I just realized (Federer related)

[Prisoner of Birth]

Del Potro is the only player other than Nadal to ever beat Federer in any of the 24 Grand Slam finals he's played. Incredible. Not sure if this merits a thread of its own but what the heck.

[Tony48]

Who "The Big Four" has lost to in GS finals:

Federer: Nadal (6x) & del Potro (1x)
Djokovic: Nadal (2x), Federer (1x), & Murray (1x)
Murray: Federer (3x), Djokovic (1x)
Nadal: Djokovic (3x), Federer (2x)

Federer has beaten 8 other players
Djokovic has beaten 1 other player
Nadal has beaten 3 other players

So yes, considering that Fed usually beats everyone not named Nadal, it is quite an achievement.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by Tony48

Who "The Big Four" has lost to in GS finals:

Federer: Nadal (6x) & del Potro (1x)
Djokovic: Nadal (2x), Federer (1x), & Murray (1x)
Murray: Federer (3x), Djokovic (1x)
Nadal: Djokovic (3x), Federer (2x)

Federer has beaten 8 other players
Djokovic has beaten 1 other player
Nadal has beaten 3 other players

So yes, considering that Fed usually beats everyone not named Nadal, it is quite an achievement.

What's interesting is that only two people managed to beat the guy in the 24 finals he's played. And one of them only once. It sounds way cool when you hear it this way

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by Tony48

Federer has beaten 8 other players
Djokovic has beaten 1 other player
Nadal has beaten 3 other players

In addition to the other Big 4:

Federer beat Philippoussis, Safin, Roddick, Agassi, Hewitt, Baghdatis, Gonzalez and Soderling.

Nadal beat Puerta, Soderling and Berdych.

Djokovic beat Tsonga.

Originally Posted by Tony48

So yes, considering that Fed usually beats everyone not named Nadal, it is quite an achievement.

Definitely something to tell his grandkids!

[Bobby Jr]

And Murray was the first person to win a major in something like the last 35 majors without having to beat either Federer or Nadal on the way.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by Bobby Jr

And Murray was the first person to win a major in something like the last 35 majors without having to beat either Federer or Nadal on the way.

Yep, and unless I'm mistaken, the last guy to do it was Andy too! ETA : Oops, I forgot about the 2004 French.

[roysid]

Yeah and that Del Potro match was an aberration. He was too casual. Fed usually wins such kind of matches. Only against Nadal does Fed look like he's fighting a losing battle.

[The Bawss]

Originally Posted by roysid

Yeah and that Del Potro match was an aberration. He was too casual. Fed usually wins such kind of matches. Only against Nadal does Fed look like he's fighting a losing battle.

I still don't understand how he lost that match. The same goes for 2009 AO. That year would have been the CYGS with the kind of game he brought to the courts that year and with the luck he got at RG.

[Crisstti]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

I still don't understand how he lost that match. The same goes for 2009 AO. That year would have been the CYGS with the kind of game he brought to the courts that year and with the luck he got at RG.

Had he won the AO that year, maybe he wouldn't have lost the USO final, with the kind of motivation he would have had...

Interesting that he had maybe a better shot at the CYGS that year than the years he was supposedly more at his peak.

[NDFM]

I wonder if anyone (excluding laver) will actually win the CYGS or 4 in a row (non calendar year). Federer, nadal and djokovic have all had at least a chance but it doesn't always go according to plan at the last hurdle or at a certain slam

[NadalDramaQueen]

Originally Posted by Crisstti

Had he won the AO that year, maybe he wouldn't have lost the USO final, with the kind of motivation he would have had...

Interesting that he had maybe a better shot at the CYGS that year than the years he was supposedly more at his peak.

He would have had an even better shot (almost a sure thing) during his peak if Nadal bowed out at RG like he did in 2009. The timing was just a bit off for Fed.

[Surecatch]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

Del Potro is the only player other than Nadal to ever beat Federer in any of the 24 Grand Slam finals he's played. Incredible. Not sure if this merits a thread of its own but what the heck.

That one still irritates me. I thought it was in the bag before and throughout the first set. Then Fed' started playing like one of his own non-Nadal GS finals opponents. <Boom>...a champion was born.

[The Bawss]

Originally Posted by NadalDramaQueen

He would have had an even better shot (almost a sure thing) during his peak if Nadal bowed out at RG like he did in 2009. The timing was just a bit off for Fed.

You never know though, if Fed had won the first 3 slams of the year, the pressure all the way through and especially in the USO final would have been immense.

P.S: What protein is that in your avatar?

[NadalDramaQueen]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

You never know though, if Fed had won the first 3 slams of the year, the pressure all the way through and especially in the USO final would have been immense.

P.S: What protein is that in your avatar?

Of course, you can't know for sure. I personally think he could have pulled it off in either 2006 or 2007 (had Nadal lost at RG). It is Actinidin.

[RF20Lennon]

Yessir that is true!!!

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

I still don't understand how he lost that match. The same goes for 2009 AO. That year would have been the CYGS with the kind of game he brought to the courts that year and with the luck he got at RG.

I never really valued a Calendar Year Grand Slam all that much. Why does it matter when you've won something when it's the same thing you've won?

[The Bawss]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

I never really valued a Calendar Year Grand Slam all that much. Why does it matter when you've won something when it's the same thing you've won?

The CYGS carries a lot of historical weight, with the Rocket being the only winner of the Open era. It also is a good measure of a player when he wins every one of the largest tournaments in one year and also that the player isn't a lil bytch that is all tired out after Wimbledon.

[Crisstti]

Originally Posted by NadalDramaQueen

He would have had an even better shot (almost a sure thing) during his peak if Nadal bowed out at RG like he did in 2009. The timing was just a bit off for Fed.

Yeah. There's a pretty big element of luck involved, which makes me not value it all that much tbh.

[NadalDramaQueen]

Originally Posted by Crisstti

Yeah. There's a pretty big element of luck involved, which makes me not value it all that much tbh.

I agree to some extent, but that is what makes the CYGS so special. You have to be remarkable to even have the opportunity and even then you need some luck. For Federer, that luck would have been Nadal tripping over a tennis ball during a practice session and having to sit out RG.

It didn't work out that way, so Federer from 2006-2007 has six slams instead of (possibly) eight.