PDA

View Full Version : Records that you belive will never be broken


avmoghe
02-15-2006, 06:58 AM
I created this thread to see what people here feel are records that will never be broken at any point in the future. I'll start off with one -

NTERNATIONAL TEAM : 'Golden set'
Description:
The only known example of a 'Golden set' (to win a set 6-0 without dropping a single point i.e., winning 24 consecutive points) in professional tennis was achieved by Bill Scanlon (USA) against Marcos Hocevar (Brazil) in the first round of the WCT Gold Coast Classic at Del Ray, FL on 22 February 1983. Scanlon won the match, 6-2, 6-0.
Who:
Denton S / Tilden W T
Country:
USA

Source: http://www.tennislovers.com/Content/guiness_noframes.htm

PS - If anyone knows how to edit the thread title, please let me know. I misspelled "believe".

slice bh compliment
02-15-2006, 07:04 AM
1988. Steffi Graf. Golden Slam.
All four majors and olympic gold in singles.
Not likely to ever be repeated let alone topped.

urban
02-15-2006, 07:40 AM
2000 women. Ilie Nastase, own count.

Grigollif1
02-15-2006, 07:51 AM
In tennis I beliebe all Winning Records have a chance to be broken, specially in the Men's side with Roger Federer. Now, In Formula 1 Michael Schumacher's 7 Championship Titles and still going.....That's a record;)

Jack Romeo
02-15-2006, 08:08 AM
with roger federer around, it seems like some of the men's records can seemingly be broken. so i'm starting with the women's records here:

1. martina navratilova's
a. 74 match winning streak, 86-1 single season record
b. 167 singles titles, 177(?) doubles titles (and counting)
c. complete set of grand slams in singles, doubles and mixed doubles
d. 9 wimbledon singles (total of 20 wimbledon titles)
2. steffi graf's
a. 371 weeks at number 1
b. golden grand slam (1988)
c. winning each major at least 4 times
3. chris evert's
a. 125-match clay court winning streak
b. 90% career win-loss percentage
c. 7 french opens
4. margaret court's
a. 24 grand slam singles titles
b. 11 australian open singles titles

the only men's records i can think about are:
1. jimmy connors - 109 singles titles
2. michael chang - youngest grand slam singles titleist (17 years)
3. rod laver - achieved grand slam 2 times

Moose Malloy
02-15-2006, 08:22 AM
2000 women. Ilie Nastase, own count.

Lol, I hadn't heard Nasty was tennis' Wilt. Read that book on him by Richard Evans. He seemed really into his wife at the time(or maybe just acted that way around the writer)

As far as the OP:
Sampras' 7 Wimbledons
Sampras' 6 year-end #1's
Lendl's 8 straight US Open finals
Borg's 6 French Opens
McEnroe's winning % in '84
Vilas' 50 match winning streak

lacoster
02-15-2006, 08:56 AM
Martina Hingis:

youngest ever junior grand slam champion: won Roland Garros juniors at age 12.

youngest ever to reach world #1 at age 16.
________
MERCEDES-BENZ W112 HISTORY (http://www.mercedes-wiki.com/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W112)

Grimjack
02-15-2006, 09:13 AM
McEnroe's winning % in '84


With all the talk about this last season, what exactly is the record, here? Is is simple winning %? If so, I think it's in danger at the start of every season. Anybody who wins a match or two, then tears an ACL or something would end the year with a 100% clip.

Is McEnroe's winning % "record" the highest percentage given a certain, qualifying number of matches? If so, what is the number? If it's "over a full schedule," how do we define full schedule? It can't have to do with GS's, because Mac didn't even play them all.

Numbers like this are curious to me.

The same could be asked of the OP. What's the record, there? Number of golden sets -- career: Scanlon -- 1? Highest percentage of points won in a single set: Scanlon -- 100%? (I'd agree that record will never be broken.)

Seems to me there's a difference between a readily definable record, in a lot of instances, and a "really impressive performance." Things like raw # of slams (total or individual), service speed, total # of wins in a year, and other easily quantifiable things are to me, necessary for the term "record" to come logically into play. All great accomplishments are not necessarily records, in the conventional sense.

alfa164164
02-15-2006, 09:27 AM
Borg should be safe with a few:
3 consecutive years winning both the French Open and Wimbledon ('78-'80)
33 consecutive victories in Davis Cup singles matches
Life time record of 49-2 at Roland Garros
Life-time record of 51-4 at Wimbledon with 41 consecutive victories (Fed is halfway to the consecutive streak)
Combined record of 100-6 at Wimby and the French
Highest winning percentage in Grand Slams (142-16, 89.9%)
Career record of 23-4 in 5 set matches
Career record on clay of 137-19 (87.8%)
Not sure if he topped Ilie's # of women though.

Grimjack
02-15-2006, 09:33 AM
Borg should be safe with a few...

Life time record of 49-2 at Roland Garros


This is illustrative of my point. Does Borg have a record, here? If so, what?

Nadal is currently, I believe, 7-0 at RG. Winning % = 100. Yet this is certainly nowhere near the level of accomplishment Borg attained there. I can't see how Borg holds a record with this figure, even though I'd agree he is the best performer RG has probably ever seen.

ACE of Hearts
02-15-2006, 09:37 AM
Here is one that could last awhile, Fed's winning streak in finals, it was at 24.It doesnt sound like much but its a tough feat.

alfa164164
02-15-2006, 09:45 AM
Tennis records, like in MLB, needs to have a "minimum # of at bats" to qualify.

Fed's 24 consecutive wins in Finals is amazing.

Moose Malloy
02-15-2006, 09:57 AM
With all the talk about this last season, what exactly is the record, here? Is is simple winning %? If so, I think it's in danger at the start of every season. Anybody who wins a match or two, then tears an ACL or something would end the year with a 100% clip.

Is McEnroe's winning % "record" the highest percentage given a certain, qualifying number of matches? If so, what is the number? If it's "over a full schedule," how do we define full schedule? It can't have to do with GS's, because Mac didn't even play them all.

Mac's '84 season has been referred to as the best winning % in the open era(including Laver in '69) I'm the ATP/ITF has some minimum # of matches required for this record or they wouldn't mention it as often as they do.
I doubt anyone has approached this mark, even with only say 40 matches instead of the 80+ that Mac had.

random1
02-15-2006, 10:55 AM
Mac's '84 season has been referred to as the best winning % in the open era(including Laver in '69) I'm the ATP/ITF has some minimum # of matches required for this record or they wouldn't mention it as often as they do.
I doubt anyone has approached this mark, even with only say 40 matches instead of the 80+ that Mac had.
Come on, Federer approached the mark. If Fed beat Nalbandian at TMC, he would have equalled Mac. That's as close as it gets. I doubt he'll manage a match record like that again though.

Moose Malloy
02-15-2006, 10:59 AM
My response was more for Grimjack's post about "minimum number of matches, ie someone could win a tournament, get injured, & still have a 100% average.
Yes, Fed got very close last year, but I don't think he (or anyone else) will get close to that mark again.

vkartikv
02-15-2006, 11:01 AM
With there being 32 seeds these days, do you think an unseeded player will ever win an GS again? It's happened only twice before with Becker and Ivanisevic. Baghdatis came close...

Moose Malloy
02-15-2006, 11:09 AM
With there being 32 seeds these days, do you think an unseeded player will ever win an GS again? It's happened only twice before with Becker and Ivanisevic. Baghdatis came close...

I wonder what the rules are with these expanded seeds. I was watching the '02 Ferrero-Costa French Open final. When NBC flashed the score when they went to break, Ferrero has his seed next to his name, while Costa(the 20 something seed) did not.

Since they added 32 seeds, Gaudio won the French as an unseeded player & Goran at '01 Wimbledon.

Rabbit
02-15-2006, 11:46 AM
Closer to home, there has been a poster retire no less than 42 times.

simi
02-15-2006, 12:43 PM
One "record" that will never, ever be broken, unless the rules change is the first round match at the 1969 Wimbledon between Ricardo Alonzo "Pancho" Gonzáles and Charles Pasarell (his former student). That match spanned two days (certainly not a long standing record) and a total of 112 games for the match. The 112 games is the record that will not be broken.

Pancho was 41 years old at the time and Pasarell was only 25. Pancho went on to play in the fourth round where he lost in four sets to Arthur Ashe. Not bad for an "old guy".

With the introduction of the tiebreak system, we will never see such a long match again. The final scoreline was 22-24, 1-6, 16-14, 6-3, 6-4. (Pancho basically threw away the second set because he was angry about having to continue to play when the light was so bad (very late in the day).)

- - - - -

Speaking of Charlie . . . he has a little tournament coming up next month in the Southern Californian desert. Hope to see some of you there.

Moose Malloy
02-15-2006, 12:47 PM
anyone want to guess which match(s) holds the record for most games in the post tiebreak era?

urban
02-15-2006, 02:05 PM
Laver's 2 Grand Slams, 184 tournament titles (following 'Total Tennis' 2003).
Borg's 3 Wim-RG combos.
Emerson's overall 28 majors.
Sampras' 6 years computer Nr.1.
Connors' USO wins on 3 different surfaces.
Edberg's computer Nr. 1 singles and doubles.
Tilden's Wim with 37 (or was Spencer Gore older).
Renshaw's 7 Wim.

Moose Malloy
02-15-2006, 02:11 PM
Edberg's computer Nr. 1 singles and doubles.

That's not a record is it? I thought Mac did that as well.

Renshaw's 7 Wim.

I try to be respectfull of all records, but wasn't this in the 1800s? When the event was just limited to club members? and the defending champ had to play only one match(the final) the next year?
Sampras has that record of 7 Wimbledons, moreso than Renshaw IMO.

urban
02-15-2006, 02:30 PM
Yes, Moose. I was a bit joking. These records of Renshaw, Sears and others are to be seen in the context of the challenge system. I wanted to point to the fact, that the singles-doubles combo is not likely to achieve today; and Edberg was the last, to do it - a very underrated success imo. If someone like Federer will try - good luck!

legolas
02-15-2006, 05:02 PM
golden slam

whistleway
02-15-2006, 05:45 PM
This is illustrative of my point. Does Borg have a record, here? If so, what?

Nadal is currently, I believe, 7-0 at RG. Winning % = 100. Yet this is certainly nowhere near the level of accomplishment Borg attained there. I can't see how Borg holds a record with this figure, even though I'd agree he is the best performer RG has probably ever seen.

Thanks for putting some sense to these "record" galore. Define them please..

tykrum
02-15-2006, 06:38 PM
Martina Hingis: youngest ever junior grand slam champion: won Roland Garros juniors at age 12. youngest ever to reach world #1 at age 16.

Both of those are crazy, but especially winning RG Jrs. at 12. Wow, didn't realize that at all.

Not tennis, but I think the best elite record in any sport is Wayne Gretzky's career points, assists, and goals. He has more assists than anyone else has points.

breakfast_of_champions
02-15-2006, 07:04 PM
My response was more for Grimjack's post about "minimum number of matches, ie someone could win a tournament, get injured, & still have a 100% average.
Yes, Fed got very close last year, but I don't think he (or anyone else) will get close to that mark again.

connors was 99-4 in 1974. i'd say pretty close if not better than 84-3.

connors 1222 match wins. ranked in top ten for 16 straight years.

World Class Forehand
02-15-2006, 09:06 PM
Vince Spadea's twenty something match losing streak.

alfa164164
02-16-2006, 05:33 AM
Give me a chance, I'll break Spadea's record EASY.

Moose Malloy
02-16-2006, 08:01 AM
breakfast_of_champions

Mac's '84 is a better winning % than Connors' '74.

timmyboy
02-16-2006, 08:03 AM
I'd have to say Steffi Graf's Golden Slam. It's a mix of wonderful Tennis, and good luck.

katarddx
02-16-2006, 05:40 PM
no such a thing... ALL the records will be broken sooner or later....

slice bh compliment
02-16-2006, 06:17 PM
except things like:
Jimmy Connors winning the US Open on three different surfaces.
74 on grass,
76 on Har-Tru
and 78, 82, 83 on Deco-Turf II.

I know, it is a bullsh*t technicality, but who is going to even approach that record?

superman1
02-16-2006, 06:39 PM
I disagree. As the depth of tennis continues to rise, it's going to be harder to maintain these streaks and beat these records. If Federer doesn't beat McEnroe's streak this year, I doubt he ever will.

breakfast_of_champions
02-16-2006, 07:43 PM
breakfast_of_champions

Mac's '84 is a better winning % than Connors' '74.

percentage wise they are basically equal, 96.55 vs 96.11, although connors played 17 more matches and won 1 more grandslam than mac. i'd say connors 74 is superior to mac's 84. and just think if they'd have let connors play the french.

chrismaylor
02-16-2006, 10:43 PM
Agassi almost did it in 96 against somebody, can't remember...i know it was close though



Christopher Maylor



http://www.********.com
Serendipity Shoe Lifts ~ Be Taller Now

ssuHeartsRivald
02-17-2006, 01:40 AM
no such a thing... ALL the records will be broken sooner or later....
Not really, some records seems really hard or have no chance to be broken.
ex: 100 points scored by Wilt Chamberlain in 1962 just was approached by 81's Bryant.

Northerly
02-17-2006, 03:50 AM
How about Steffi Graf winning each of the Grand Slams at least 4 times each?

Of the active players today, I believe only S Williams can claim to have just one "career Slam" - Graf had 4!

jamumafa
02-17-2006, 07:06 AM
I like the Bull***** techinicality on Connors USO wins. That'll never be broken

chaognosis
02-17-2006, 08:31 AM
Not really, some records seems really hard or have no chance to be broken.
ex: 100 points scored by Wilt Chamberlain in 1962 just was approached by 81's Bryant.

Wilt's 100 is actually an approachable record, though it will take a very special performance by a very special player to do it. (Kobe is capable.) Many of Gretzky's scoring records, believe it or not, are breakable as well, though I doubt we'll ever see another player pull off 50 goals in 39 games. Here's my favorite record, and one which I guarantee will NEVER be touched: Cy Young's 511 wins.

breakfast_of_champions
02-17-2006, 05:05 PM
Wilt's 100 is actually an approachable record, though it will take a very special performance by a very special player to do it. (Kobe is capable.) Many of Gretzky's scoring records, believe it or not, are breakable as well, though I doubt we'll ever see another player pull off 50 goals in 39 games. Here's my favorite record, and one which I guarantee will NEVER be touched: Cy Young's 511 wins.

i think its pretty safe to say noone will average 50 points per game.

kbg
02-17-2006, 07:00 PM
Bjorn Borg's 6 French Opens and 5 Wimbledons. I can't even begin to imagine the kind of player that's going to top that.

ACE of Hearts
02-17-2006, 07:04 PM
Well if u mean the 5 wimbledon in a row, thats a tough feat but if somehow Roger can win wimbledon this year, he will have 4 straight and 07 will be a riot as he tries to tie the mark barring injury.