Will nadal ever dominate roland garros?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by sonicare, Jun 4, 2012.

  1. sonicare

    sonicare Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,733
    Location:
    london
    Like fed dominated wimbledon and us open? He needs to win 5 roland garros in a row to dominate a slam

    He needs to win 3 more in a row.

    Do you think he can pull if off?

    P.s. if you lose before winning 5 in a row, it resets. Just like a video game. You are back on level 1

    Please respond.
     
    #1
  2. gold soundz

    gold soundz Professional

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Messages:
    969
    Haha. Yeah, I guess Federer is more dominant at the USO and Wimbledon than Nadal at RG, you're right. I don't think Nadal will ever be that dominant.
     
    #2
  3. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,490
    I agree. A lot seems to be made of Nadal's French Open totals yet Federer has achieved far more at both Wimbledon and the US Open. The US Open in particular allows far more players to be competitive so winning 5 of them in a row is greater achievement than five French Opens imo.

    Still... it's relative. Muster is considered by some to be a clay god yet he has a worse French Open record than Federer who is almost considered bad on clay compared to his hard court and grass performances.
     
    #3
  4. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,114
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Show me a major where Federer has a 49-1 win-loss record?

    As for Muster, he underperformed at the French Open during his career. He was brilliant in winning the title in 1995, but he usually underperformed at Roland Garros. Muster's strength on clay is his 1 French Open, 3 Monte Carlos, 3 Romes, 40 clay-court titles overall, and the amazing 111-5 win-loss record in 1995-1996 on clay. Muster's prime was February 1995 until March 1997, a 25 month period where Muster won 21 of his 44 career titles.
     
    #4
  5. sonicare

    sonicare Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,733
    Location:
    london
    give me the consecutive matches won in a major.

    Soon as you lose, you are back to level one.

    Considering you are a stats guy, give me the consecutive matches won in each slam in the open era. I would really appreciate that

    Thanks in advance.
     
    #5
  6. psYcon

    psYcon Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    624
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    as much as I am a Federer fan, I have to agree that as far as dominance is concerned, Nadal dominates Roland Garros much more than Federer dominated Wimbledon or US open.
     
    #6
  7. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,114
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    In the open era?


    Most consecutive matches won at the:

    Australian Open: 26 - by Andre Agassi (2000-2004)
    French Open: 31 - by Rafael Nadal (2005-2009)
    Wimbledon: 41 - by Bjorn Borg (1976-1981)
    US Open: 40 - by Roger Federer (2004-2009)
     
    #7
  8. norbac

    norbac Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2008
    Messages:
    8,577
    Yes, Rafa is a noob. Back at level 1.....
     
    #8
  9. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Nadal at Roland Garros is going to blow Federer at Wimbledon or the U.S Open out of the water. He already has as many Wimbledon titles as Federer, more U.S Opens, and while Nadal is likely to win multiple more French Opens, Federer is unlikely to ever win another Wimbledon imparticular. Nadal is also likely to break the all time RG record this week, while Federer does not even tie for either the Wimbledon or U.S Open al time record, the best he does is being in a 3 way tie for the Open Era only U.S Open record currently. So Nadal will never be as dominant as Federer at those two slams, since he is already MORE dominant. Every year except 2011 since 2005 it is pretty much a lock in everyones mind Nadal will win RG, moreso than Federer at any slam.
     
    #9
  10. texasdoc

    texasdoc Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    117
    Fed has reached the final of all slams and yr end tourrnament at least 5 times - that is called GOAT.
     
    #10
  11. Atherton2003

    Atherton2003 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    3,326
    I was wondering if anyone else noticed a resemblence between Schiavone and Nadal?
     
    #11
  12. nadal_slam_king

    nadal_slam_king Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,458
    Federer lost in the 1st Round of Wimbledon THREE times. Kind of a joke compared to Nadal at Roland Garros. I think the bigger question is: how many Wimbledons will Nadal win? I'm thinking around 5.

    btw Nadal is going to be winning Roland Garros after age 30.
     
    #12
  13. sonicare

    sonicare Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,733
    Location:
    london
    Thanks man. Shouldn't roger and bjorn have the same at wimby cos they both lost in the final in the 6th attempt?

    And whats bjorns consecutive record at rg?
     
    #13
  14. nadal_slam_king

    nadal_slam_king Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,458
    Will Federer ever win 7 of a slam?

    Sampras has 7 Wimbledons.

    Nadal has 7 Roland Garros titles in a few days.

    Federer is silly for not joining the elite.
     
    #14
  15. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,114
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    They would have, but Federer didn't play a Round of 16 match at 2007 Wimbledon due to Tommy Haas withdrawing.

    Borg won 28 matches in a row at the French Open from 1978-1981.
     
    #15
  16. sonicare

    sonicare Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,733
    Location:
    london
    Let me know when either one of them win 2 slams 5 in a row.
     
    #16
  17. MG1

    MG1 Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    984
    Fed has won 2 different slams 5 or more times and have a shot doing this at AO while till now nadal has only 1-2 slam at 3 different slam that show variety.
     
    #17
  18. Djokodal Fan

    Djokodal Fan Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,308
    when was winning 5 years considered dominant? is that your scale? i say 49-1 is called being dominant.

    So has The ballerina dancer ever dominated? Pls answer!
     
    #18
  19. sonicare

    sonicare Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,733
    Location:
    london
    Nadal lost after 31 matches at RG. You loose, dominance over. Have to start from 0 again.

    Not rocket science.
     
    #19
  20. Tony48

    Tony48 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Messages:
    6,899
    I really wouldn't base dominance SOLELY on how many times you've done something consecutively.
     
    #20
  21. Sid_Vicious

    Sid_Vicious G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    11,680
    Location:
    In The City
    No, but in the span of 2003-2009, Federer was 47-1 at Wimbledon.
     
    #21
  22. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,490
    The slam win-loss record that really matters in total domination stakes is how many 7-0 records you can string together in a row.

    In that respect Federer's win-loss records at both the US Open and Wimbledon are much better than Nadal's at the French. 5-0 at Wimbledon and 5-0 at the US Open... compared to 4-0 for Nadal at the French.
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2012
    #22
  23. Retra

    Retra Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    191
    *******s are absolutely desperate :).
     
    #23
  24. Raz11

    Raz11 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Messages:
    702
    lol 49-1 and winning 6 out of the last 7 RG is dominance. Even though he may not have won it all consecutively, I would consider him just as dominant as Federer at US/Wimbledon during his prime/peak.
     
    #24
  25. roysid

    roysid Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,413
    The OP wants to start a flame war. He is kidding right. Most ridiculous thing I've ever heard "Will rafa ever dominate roland garros"?

    Nobody has dominated a slam the way Nadal did at French.

    Roger had lost multiple times at Wimbledon and USO before 2003. Also losing to Tsongs/Berdych at QF doesn't look good.

    So what if Nadal didn't win 5 consecutive times. He has won 6 of the last 7. Looks like it will be 7 of last 8. Only Pete Sampras has won 7 of 8. But even he was not as dominant in these 7 victories as Nadal.
     
    #25
  26. TennisLovaLova

    TennisLovaLova Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    3,073

    Man you always kill me with your stats!!!
    the guy known as the tennis historian
     
    #26
  27. roysid

    roysid Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,413
    The stat that is most important is how many titles won. not consecutive matches.

    Pete Sampras : 7 wimbledon titles beats Bjorn Borg and Federer though they had won 41 and 40 consecutive matches.

    Next it will be what is the highest service games without break. That guy is the greatest dominator :)
     
    #27

Share This Page