Do you see anybody else surpassing 17 Slams in the sport of tennis at any point?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Mike Sams, Jan 8, 2013.

  1. Mike Sams

    Mike Sams Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    5,270
    If Federer retires at 17 Slams and Nadal is unable to break the record, do you believe somebody else at some point will break it? If you think about it this way, Sampras set the 14 Slam record only in 2002. It ONLY took 7 years for somebody else to come along and break it!
    If somebody else emerges in the next few years and the competition is weak, he could go onto a tear and rack up a lot of Slams.
    Nadal looked like he was closing in on it until Djokovic came to his prime. So likely somebody else in the coming years will set a new Slam record.
    Basically Nadal is the best candidate to do it but I don't see it happening now. It will have to be somebody else down the road.
     
    #1
  2. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Are you alluding that Fed overtook Peter only because Fed's competition was weak? :?

    And no,Ralph is very much still in contention to overtake Fed's slam count as long as he keeps winning RGs(realistically a minimum of 10/11 RGs :lol: )
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 8, 2013
    #2
  3. Prisoner of Birth

    Prisoner of Birth Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2012
    Messages:
    2,786
    Obviously. Records are meant to be broken, as the cliché goes.
     
    #3
  4. joeri888

    joeri888 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    13,120
    Somewhere, someday, sure. With current conditions and technology its more possible than ever before. If a new Federer talentwise came up in a few years, I wouldn't bet against it. Don't see anyone from the next generation doing it though.
     
    #4
  5. -RF-

    -RF- Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2012
    Messages:
    2,211
    Location:
    London
    In my lifetime Fed will hold the record. Imo Tennis as we know it will cease to exist in 50-60 years
     
    #5
  6. always_crosscourt

    always_crosscourt Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2013
    Messages:
    496
    I think it will be broken in the generation after Tomic's. So give it 10 years.
     
    #6
  7. Chanwan

    Chanwan Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,543
    It should happen at some point - whether it will be by Nadal or some unheard of or even unborn player, is hard to say yet.
    But presuming Nadal overcomes his injury or what it is he's dealing with, he should have at least 2-3 more RG's + whatever else goes his way. So that's pretty close already.
     
    #7
  8. Alchemy-Z

    Alchemy-Z Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2010
    Messages:
    1,503
    Location:
    Augusta, GA
    It will be. Just in this era we might have 3 10+ slam winners


    we already Have Roger (17) and Nadal (11)

    and Novak is on his way (5) probably 6 after the AO this year.
     
    #8
  9. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    I doubt a male player will do it after Federer in my lifetime. Female? Much easier to do.
     
    #9
  10. Mike Sams

    Mike Sams Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    5,270
    Nadal needs to win 7 more Slams to break it. Does he have 7 more Slams in him? Especially with the likes of Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro, Federer, etc who are all still very active and legitimate contenders in the Slams? If we do the math, Nadal won 8 Slams over 5 years (2008-2012). In the past 2 years he's won 2 Slams, both on clay. So if his Slam winning days are slowing down, does he have another 7-8 years on the tour to reach 7 more Slams to surpass the 17 mark? I don't think he will do it in the next 5 years as I don't think he can rack up 2-3 Slams per year anymore like he did in 2008 and 2010. I think it's likely 1 Slam per year for him.
     
    #10
  11. nadal_GOAT_king

    nadal_GOAT_king Rookie

    Joined:
    May 19, 2012
    Messages:
    137
    It would most likely take a while. I am certain we won't see it happening with the current generation of kids born in the early '90s i.e Dimitrov, Tomic, Harrison, et al.
     
    #11
  12. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,239
    If any future player is going to break Roger's record he has to be:

    -incredibly gifted talent
    -a threat on all surfaces
    -start winning slam at early age(unlike Nole started out late)
    -consistently playing high level throughout his career
    -almost injury free
    -can't skip any slam event
     
    #12
  13. McEnroeisanartist

    McEnroeisanartist Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,199
    Not happening. Federer is a once in a lifetime player if not once in two or three lifetimes. He is like Mozart, where you wonder if Federer is an extension of God.
     
    #13
  14. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,239
    Nadal won his first slam at a very young age, so did Borg, Chang, Becker. However, they lack a few attributes that I've mentioned above which limited their slam count. Sampras won his 1st slam(1990) exactly 3 years younger than Federer(2003), but he's no Federer.
     
    #14
  15. DunlopDood

    DunlopDood Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    448
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Hard to say, then again I didn't think Sampras' record would have been broken so soon.

    I think this whole slam record thing is way overrated considering Rod Leaver would have at least 25 if not for obvious reasons. in the 70's and 80's no one played the australian open, it wasn't even considered that big a tourney, How may more slams would Mcenroe, Borg, and even Agassi, who only started playing there in 95, have? I guess in this day and age greatness has to be quantified, however I don't think its an indication of who is the greatest.
     
    #15
  16. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    Well if you want go ahead and count Rod Laver's slam total including his actual pro majors he won while on the pro tour. 8 pro majors plus 11 actual slams. 19 total. That 25 hypothetical majors he "could" have won is just that, a hypothetical
     
    #16
  17. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    And BTW, OP should have just said in the thread title would anyone ever surpass Federer's total, because that 17 figure is not yet set in stone. He could win more, making your thread obsolete and not stand the test of time in terms of accuracy
     
    #17
  18. Hood_Man

    Hood_Man Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2009
    Messages:
    8,324
    Location:
    Wales
    Yes. Someone will come along who has the physical talent, the full range of shots, and the will power and mental strength to achieve great things, but with the added bonus of having a clear goal to aim for.

    That and having 32 seeds instead of 16 is making it easier for the top guys to reach the later stages on a regular basis, by avoiding the more dangerous "lower" ranked players earlier on. I don't think it's too wild a stab to imagine that Federer/Nadal and perhaps Djokovic have benefited greatly from that.
     
    #18
  19. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,239
    False premise. The slam that Laver didn't play was during the amateur, which all fans including Laver fans have conceded the field was incredibly weak. They take Emerson 12 amateur slams with a grain of salt. Even if Laver chose not to turn pro and stay as an amateur, we don't know how many slam he would win and it's only a guess. Let be nice and say he managed to win 17, but the amateur slam is worth 10x less than the modern slam.

    Winning slam in the open era is not overrrated. If it is, there would be many players winning slams. How many player have won atleast 10 slams in their career. Only Fed, Sampras, Nadal and Borg. 4 players !!
     
    #19
  20. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,239
    The pro majors only had 8-14 players, they are equivalent to today's WTF. 6 of Laver 11 slams are from the amateur(before the open era).
     
    #20
  21. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,898
    I can see someone winning 25.
     
    #21
  22. smoledman

    smoledman Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,417
    Location:
    USA
    I don't see Djokovic getting past 8.
     
    #22
  23. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    Oh I am quite aware of that, I also don't consider a pro major of having equal value to a contemporary major. Was just pointing out Laver's "total" instead of hypothetically agreeing he would have won 25 or so majors if he was allowed to compete
     
    #23
  24. JustBob

    JustBob Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,992
    At some point, maybe. Any time soon? No way in hell.
     
    #24
  25. TMF

    TMF Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2009
    Messages:
    21,239
    25 Master Series is already a tall order.
     
    #25
  26. Monsieur_DeLarge

    Monsieur_DeLarge Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    Messages:
    492
    John "148mph serve" Isner. He's gonna do 18.
    In. A. Row.


    Combine the player who's competed in the most slams (Fabrice Santoro, 70) with the highest career slam-winning percentage (Bjorn Borg, 41%), and you get a theoretical maximum of 28-29. However, I think longevity and "short term" [sic] dominance like that are mutually incompatible ~ Santoro never played seven matches in any of his slams ~ so I don't believe anyone will ever reach that hypothetical total.

    However, since the AO regained significance in the late '80s, we've had three players win more than 10. I'd therefore say someone winning 20 in my lifetime (30+ years, touch wood) is statistically possible.


    Regards,
    MDL
     
    #26
  27. Cosmic_Colin

    Cosmic_Colin Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2011
    Messages:
    853
    Location:
    Cambridge, UK
    At some point in the next few hundred years we'll figure out how to stop ageing, or at least dramatically slow it down.

    That would allow players to develop decades of experience and technique whilst remaining at their physical peak. They could just keep playing for 40 years until they have all the slams they want.

    At that point all 'count' records will be broken so easily that they'd become obsolete. We'd need to look at win %, slams per year etc.
     
    #27
  28. always_crosscourt

    always_crosscourt Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2013
    Messages:
    496
    An unborn player!?

    That means the record will stand for at least 20 years - do you honestly think that into 2033 Federer's 17 slam (or however many he adds to that) record will stand? I can't see that happening.
     
    #28
  29. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,898
    I see it as some young phenom that starts winning slams in his late teens that might take a more Serena-like approach to the tour (so as not to burn out early). That, coupled with an era in which there are no consistent players at the top, could allow for something like that to happen, IMO.

    A perfect storm of domination, so to speak.
     
    #29
  30. always_crosscourt

    always_crosscourt Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2013
    Messages:
    496
    So you're saying that Federer will be regarded as greater than Nadal for the next couple hundred years until this time-stasis device is invented - at which point, Nadal will be considered greater than Federer because total slam wins will be disregarded in favor of the H2H?

    Well, I guess there is some hope for Nards.
     
    #30
  31. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,686
    Cvac will do it.
     
    #31
  32. JustBob

    JustBob Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,992
    It will hold for a heck of a lot longer than 20 years.

    Some people seriously underestimate how hard winning slams is, let alone 17+
     
    #32
  33. single_handed_champion

    single_handed_champion Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,104
    Tennis has existed for longer than any one person's lifetime, so your compliment is hardly much of one. Also, many people (with serious credentials) would not have Mozart in even their list of the top 5 greatest composers ever.
     
    #33
  34. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,496
    are you serious?
     
    #34
  35. NatF

    NatF G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    May 10, 2012
    Messages:
    13,873
    Location:
    On the road from would of to would have
    It will happen, not sure when though. If he gets to 20 I don't see it being broken for a long long time.
     
    #35
  36. smoledman

    smoledman Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,417
    Location:
    USA
    Federer is a once in a century talent.
     
    #36
  37. Fedex

    Fedex Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,655
    Location:
    Dundee
    IMO Djokovic is the best candidate based on general form and consistency.
    The big obstacle for him though is Murray who would have to be out of the picture then you could contemplate him getting close or even surpassing Federer.
    Let's assume Murray declines or is long term injured then you can see Djokovic possibly having a Grand Slam or near year picking up at least AO, FO and USO. That's three this year taking his slam tally up to 8.
    Assume he has a Grand Slam year. Not inconceivable with Murray out of the frame and with Fed and Nadal looking to fade away with each passing year taking his tally up to 12. Then 2 per year for the next 3 years = 18.
    Generally, no one else really outside the top 4 has bothered or tested Djokovic so you would assume this trend would continuefor several years making my crude hypothesis feasible.
     
    #37
  38. forzamilan90

    forzamilan90 Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,516
    Except Murray isn't just going to drop dead all of a sudden. I doubt Djokovic will reach Nadal figures, let alone Federer.
     
    #38
  39. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,496
    Seppi, Tsonga RG 2012
     
    #39
  40. pc1

    pc1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    9,413
    It's actually pretty much been done already. Margaret Court won 24 majors and Graf won 22 majors among the women. The difference was that Court didn't have to miss majors like Rosewall, Gonzalez and Laver did because of the Pro/Amateur divide for decades and because of various boycotts.

    Since we play in a time where every top player plays every major I can see 25 majors won as a distinct possibility. It probably would have been done by players like Bill Tilden in the 1920's and 1930's if the travel conditions weren't so bad. The player would take weeks to travel to play Wimbledon or the US Nationals. Can you imagine the time it would take some to play in Australia? Tilden was virtually unbeatable for years and may have won several calendar year Grand Slams during his peak years. It's estimated that he won about 98% of his matches during his peak. Even with the travel problems he won ten majors and at his peak won eight straight majors.

    I was so amused when people were in such awe at the great record of 14 majors by Pete Sampras. I knew it was very vulnerable and probably would be broken in the near future. Remember that if you're a great player it's easier to win a lot of majors if you play a lot of them. The top players of the past turned pro to make money and were not allowed to play the majors. It doesn't take away from the fact Sampras was a great player but I thought his record were overrated. Sampras has a lot more going for him aside from him winning 14 majors.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2013
    #40
  41. DRII

    DRII Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    6,458
    Perhaps Nadal; if he remains healthy for the next 5 or more years (equaling the amount of time Federer's been on tour going by age).

    As a matter of fact I'm sure Nadal would do it if he remained healthy, but thats a big if...
     
    #41
  42. mattennis

    mattennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,234
    If they stay with 32 seeds ( since 2001 ) and slow-medium surfaces (and slow balls) in all four GS....it could happen.

    But if they go back to 16 seeds and they go back to faster surfaces (and faster balls) in Wimbledon and US OPEN (better said, totally polarized conditions in the four GS AND the rest of the Tour) as it always was, then it won't happen.

    So the better/equivalent question would be: are they (the powers that be) going to change things and go back to totally polarized conditions and 16 seeds, or are they going to basically leave it as it is right now?
     
    #42
  43. Mike Sams

    Mike Sams Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    5,270
    How could anybody in history remain healthy playing Nadal's type of style? :lol: :lol:
     
    #43
  44. ollinger

    ollinger Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2004
    Messages:
    6,041
    So the point of this thread is "can a record that's been broken twice in the last decade ever be broken again"??? Is this REALLY the question?? If so, why?
     
    #44
  45. DRII

    DRII Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    6,458
    I believe Nadal was born with foot issues, which then eventually affected his knees throughout his tennis career. True that Nadal's style is more physically taxing, but genetics plays a role as well. Some are just luckier than others...
     
    #45
  46. zam88

    zam88 Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Messages:
    1,341
    Yeah, i think it will someday when they add a fifth slam or something and basically mess up all the records.


    Keep in mind that if everyone in the 70's 80's and 90's had known that slam counting would be the pathway to GOAT, they sure wouldn't have skipped the Aussie like most of the players did.

    I think there would've been more guys with 10+ majors had they also taken the aussie seriously instead of mainly just playing 3 majors a year.


    Having said that, I expect that by the time its broken that i won't give a crap about tennis anymore.


    I really expect tennis ratings to severely plummet after Pwnerer hangs it up...

    Maybe another comes along later... kind of like a new LeBron or Kobe or compare to the Michael Jordan.. but ultimately they'll never quite match up completely.
     
    #46
  47. JustBob

    JustBob Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,992
    It will be broken in 2046 by Roger Federer Junior.
     
    #47
  48. PrinceMoron

    PrinceMoron Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,168
    People bother to play the AO these days so that increase the likelihood.
    People are bothered about records these days, so that does too.
    You don't have to be good on grass
    Players take better care of themselves
    Nadal should have stopped years ago but medical kept him going, players can be rebuilt and keep on going.
    The money is ridiculous, so players will play till they drop.
    You can't get beaten by some doping cheat, top talent will win. Tennis is clean.
    It is so hard to be successful on the pro tour, even to get started and the top players just keep on going.

    Otoh

    A real wunderkid, a real fighter ie McEnroe or Connors could go on for ever these days.

    The record is there to be broken, it is not like someone won grand slams for 5 years plus a few either side.

    Who could do it? Nadal might be in for a nasty shock when he comes back. Djokovic yes, if he had done better a little earlier and his style of play did not depend on his flexibility.

    All things considered it will happen but not in my lifetime.
     
    #48
  49. ultradr

    ultradr Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,534
    I think this will prove right.

    During 30's - 60's, when 3 out of 4 slams (and pro slams) were on grass: guys like Gonzales and Laver won ~20+ amateur and pro slams, AFAIK.

    Pancho Gonzales : 24 slams
    Rod Laver: 19 slams
    Bill Tiden: 19 slams

    Now, all 4 slams play on more or less similarly slow, bouncy conditions with heavy balls.

    If this homogeneous conditions do not change in the future, the greatest player of coming decade will have chance to collect 20+ slams.

    Of course, we gotta have players with Gonzales, Laver, Tiden's caliber..
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2013
    #49
  50. JustBob

    JustBob Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,992
    I disagree that the current, homogenized, relatively slow conditions are ideal for breaking that record. In fact I believe it's the opposite for the following reasons:

    - Current conditions are perfect for baseliner/grinder type players who rely on physicality and defense.

    - That style of play really takes it's toll on a player's body and will lead to more injuries and shortened careers.

    In short:

    Ain't no baseliner/grinder dude gonna break that record on them slow *** surfaces. :)
     
    #50

Share This Page