INSANE GOAT STAT: 18/19 SLAM FINALS IN A ROW - AND WINNING SIXTEEN

Federev

Federev

Legend
It is just sick insane.

Just Ridiculous.

Laughably unbelievable.

Almost impossible to ever match.

It's the kind of stat that should mean the guy who does that also wins 3 of the last 5 slams at ages 35-36.

So he's done that too.

Just needed to celebrate this.

[OOPS!! I was wrong apparently - he did not win 16 through that time, but 12.]
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
Federev said:
It is just sick insane.

Just Ridiculous.

Laughably unbelievable.

Almost impossible to ever match.

It's the kind of stat that should mean the guy who does that also wins 3 of the last 5 slams at ages 35-36.

So he's done that too.

Just needed to celebrate this.
Click to expand...

I know the consecutive SF streak gets a lot of mention here, for me 18/19 has always been the most mind blowing of his stats.

Almost 5 straight years making finals in the open era!
 
M

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
And he only lost the one semi due to mono, too. So yeah, that wasn't too shabby for a weak-era mug. Shows that he was only playing against recreational players during this time frame, though. I mean, Swiss, Spaniards and Serbs as top tennis players? Give me a break. Why not a Scot, too?

And he didn't win 16 of them, but less (12, if memory serves).
 
R

reaper

Legend
It shows an enormous strength and a minor weakness. Federer was nigh on unbeatable against his inferiors, but eminently beatable by his peers.
 
D

Deleted member 3771

Guest
Federev said:
It is just sick insane.

Just Ridiculous.

Laughably unbelievable.

Almost impossible to ever match.

It's the kind of stat that should mean the guy who does that also wins 3 of the last 5 slams at ages 35-36.

So he's done that too.

Just needed to celebrate this.
Click to expand...


Unbelievable dominance at slams. Only Rafa was his Kryptonite!

He made 23 grand slam semis in a row, winning 20 of those 23 semis, and winning 14 of the 20 finals. He lost 6 finals, 5 to Rafa and 1 to Delpo, and was 2-5 in slam finals v Rafa during that run.

During Djoko's best 23 slams in a row, he made the semis 22/23 times, winning 18/22 semis, and winning 11/18 of the slam finals.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
Just to throw out dominance numbers in past tennis history.

Maureen Connolly won 9 straight majors she entered including the Grand Slam. Helen Wills won 19 of 24 majors entered. Two of the majors lost was when she withdrew due to illness.

I think at one point Wills didn't lose a set for 7 years.

Bill Tilden won 8 straight majors that he entered. It would be nine if you included the World Hardcourt which was the equivalent of the French Open in those days.

Don Budge won the 1938 Grand Slam and 6 straight majors.

Navratilova won 6 straight majors and was 427-14 from 1982 to 1986.
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
75 top-8 players were beaten by one player in those days.

124 top-8 players were beaten by one player in a similar time span between 2010 and 2016...
 
Tennisanity

Tennisanity

Legend
Yes 18/19 slam finals is the greatest stat. Basically for almost 5 years, you could expect Fed in the final of the slam, amazing. Nadal pales so much in comparison. Nothing he did no clay compares to this. Djokovic? The only thing he did that can be mentioned his 4 slams in a row.
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
pc1 said:
Just to throw out dominance numbers in past tennis history.

Maureen Connolly won 9 straight majors she entered including the Grand Slam. Helen Wills won 19 of 24 majors entered. Two of the majors lost was when she withdrew due to illness.

I think at one point Wills didn't lose a set for 7 years.

Bill Tilden won 8 straight majors that he entered. It would be nine if you included the World Hardcourt which was the equivalent of the French Open in those days.

Don Budge won the 1938 Grand Slam and 6 straight majors.

Navratilova won 6 straight majors and was 427-14 from 1982 to 1986.
Click to expand...

Nice post.

Good to have people here reminding us of the storied history in this great game of ours.

I don’t see why one player’s accomplishments should automatically belittle another’s - past and present.

Thanks for this.
 
pc1

pc1

G.O.A.T.
Tennisanity said:
Yes 18/19 slam finals is the greatest stat. Basically for almost 5 years, you could expect Fed in the final of the slam, amazing. Nadal pales so much in comparison. Nothing he did no clay compares to this. Djokovic? The only thing he did that can be mentioned his 4 slams in a row.
Click to expand...

You write about that accomplishment by Djokovic as though it was nothing. That's pretty fantastic also.

But yes you'll right, Federer was dominant for many years.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
Tennisanity said:
Yes 18/19 slam finals is the greatest stat. Basically for almost 5 years, you could expect Fed in the final of the slam, amazing. Nadal pales so much in comparison. Nothing he did no clay compares to this. Djokovic? The only thing he did that can be mentioned his 4 slams in a row.
Click to expand...

pc1 said:
You write about that accomplish by Djokovic as though it was nothing. That's pretty fantastic also.

But yes you'll right, Federer was dominant for many years.
Click to expand...

It’s quite gratifying, I’d meant exactly this as I filled in the second part of my response to you:

Hydrocella said:
Nice post.

Good to have people here reminding us of the storied history in this great game of ours.

I don’t see why one player’s accomplishments should automatically belittle another’s - past and present.

Thanks for this.
Click to expand...
 
R

reaper

Legend
Steve0904 said:
One other leading player. The other one couldn't do it consistently until Federer was almost 30 (and we've seen what happened to that player around the age of 30) And let's not forget Murray who has a grand total of one slam win over Federer.
Click to expand...

It's not really clear as a general rule what happens to players approaching 30 in the modern game. Many years ago as a matter of routine their form would deteriorate but in more recent times we've seen Wawrinka embark on a slam winning spree, Murray ascend to the top of the game and even Nadal playing what was once considered a young man's style win multiple slams in a single season and recapture the number 1 ranking. It's not entirely clear when modern players are past their best.
 
R

reaper

Legend
mike danny said:
You mean, the other leading player. Singular.
Click to expand...

Nadal and Djokovic..so plural. Obviously Nadal's record for an extended period was a mismatch in terms of when they played each other, but Djokovic boasted a strong record against Federer too. He beat him in a number of big matches. Federer seemed to have a psychological issue when challenged in big matches after his extended period of dominance. The USO final of 2015 was a classic example where he played beautifully for much of it but couldn't convert a break point to save his life. Perhaps the most impressive aspect of his 2017 comeback at the AO was that he mastered the fragility that had plagued him in big moments against key rivals in that final set against Nadal. While some internet spruikers might pretend it didn't exist, Federer went beyond denial, acknowledged it was there and in so doing laid the path to conquer it.
 
Steve0904

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
reaper said:
It's not really clear as a general rule what happens to players approaching 30 in the modern game. Many years ago as a matter of routine their form would deteriorate but in more recent times we've seen Wawrinka embark on a slam winning spree, Murray ascend to the top of the game and even Nadal playing what was once considered a young man's style win multiple slams in a single season and recapture the number 1 ranking. It's not entirely clear when modern players are past their best.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you consider their best to be. Djokovic is likely past his best even if he comes back to a decent level. As are Nadal and Federer even though they're still winning. Wawrinka is a bit of a different case since he put everything together late in his career and never had the mileage of the others. Del Potro is another guy that I could definitely see playing well at an advanced tennis age if his wrist holds up.

Generally I think 30 or shortly after it is still the declining age for a tennis player. Definitely for an ATG that has to win the majority of his slams in his early-mid 20's. Nadal's 2015-16, Djokovic's 2017-18 and Federer's 2010-11 are all around the same age timeline wise. Also, Djokovic and Murray are now injured and have been for some time. Nadal shows more wear and tear, and Federer's had knee and back problems in 2013 and 2016. The difference between past and present is that 30 used to mean completely done forever. Now it means to try any medical advancement you can to get back on top. That, and the younger players are simply not good enough to truly replace the older players. There are no dominant forces consistently beating Federer and Nadal so here we are.
 
M

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
reaper said:
Nadal and Djokovic..so plural. Obviously Nadal's record for an extended period was a mismatch in terms of when they played each other, but Djokovic boasted a strong record against Federer too. He beat him in a number of big matches. Federer seemed to have a psychological issue when challenged in big matches after his extended period of dominance. The USO final of 2015 was a classic example where he played beautifully for much of it but couldn't convert a break point to save his life. Perhaps the most impressive aspect of his 2017 comeback at the AO was that he mastered the fragility that had plagued him in big moments against key rivals in that final set against Nadal. While some internet spruikers might pretend it didn't exist, Federer went beyond denial, acknowledged it was there and in so doing laid the path to conquer it.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Federer was 3/1 in slams vs Djokovic during this 18/19 period, his only loss being due to mono (the one which prevented a perfect 19/19). As for his losses around 34/35, these are actually par for the course. Older players (even ATG's) generally play big matches pretty badly (probably because they feel the pressure that this is their last chance and they musn't let it slip) so Djokovic probably wasn't the only reason why Fed was subpar (especially in 2015, where he demolished the competition up to the final both at Wimbledon and the US Open, and played pretty tamely during both finals). The incredible stat is that he was able to win all three slam finals he played in 2017/2018, especially the two in Australia, where he had to come from behind in the fifth (even this year, Cilic had breakpoint first in the fifth set after blasting Fed off the court in the second part of the fourth). At such an age, that's pretty remarkable (and unheard of, actually).
 
Sum Buddy Ells

Sum Buddy Ells

Hall of Fame
Next insane GOAT stat on the way...

australia_110_km_speed_limit.jpg
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
reaper said:
Nadal and Djokovic..so plural. Obviously Nadal's record for an extended period was a mismatch in terms of when they played each other, but Djokovic boasted a strong record against Federer too. He beat him in a number of big matches. Federer seemed to have a psychological issue when challenged in big matches after his extended period of dominance. The USO final of 2015 was a classic example where he played beautifully for much of it but couldn't convert a break point to save his life. Perhaps the most impressive aspect of his 2017 comeback at the AO was that he mastered the fragility that had plagued him in big moments against key rivals in that final set against Nadal. While some internet spruikers might pretend it didn't exist, Federer went beyond denial, acknowledged it was there and in so doing laid the path to conquer it.
Click to expand...
Federer was 34 years old at that time, a lot removed from his period of reaching 18/19 slam finals.

Djokovic was not an issue for Federer during that said period.

So it's only Nadal, singular.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
reaper said:
It's not really clear as a general rule what happens to players approaching 30 in the modern game. Many years ago as a matter of routine their form would deteriorate but in more recent times we've seen Wawrinka embark on a slam winning spree, Murray ascend to the top of the game and even Nadal playing what was once considered a young man's style win multiple slams in a single season and recapture the number 1 ranking. It's not entirely clear when modern players are past their best.
Click to expand...
Wawrinka never had a peak before 2014. So he is the exception, not the rule.

Murray had brilliant seasons even before 2016. He didn't magically peak that year.

Federer in his 30's was dealing with a player in Djokovic at his very peak, so it was clearly not an even playing field. You don't believe that matters? Look at how Nadal has performed against Federer recently. If Nadal could not handle a 35-36 year old Federer, why was Federer expected to handle a peak Djokovic?
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
merlinpinpin said:
Yes and no. Federer was 4/1 in slams vs Djokovic during this 18/19 period, his only loss being due to mono (the one which prevented a perfect 19/19). As for his losses around 34/35, these are actually par for the course. Older players (even ATG's) generally play big matches pretty badly (probably because they feel the pressure that this is their last chance and they musn't let it slip) so Djokovic probably wasn't the only reason why Fed was subpar (especially in 2015, where he demolished the competition up to the final both at Wimbledon and the US Open, and played pretty tamely during both finals). The incredible stat is that he was able to win all three slam finals he played in 2017/2018, especially the two in Australia, where he had to come from behind in the fifth (even this year, Cilic had breakpoint first in the fifth set after blasting Fed off the court in the second part of the fourth). At such an age, that's pretty remarkable (and unheard of, actually).
Click to expand...
Fixed.
 
R

reaper

Legend
Murray had brilliant seasons even before 2016. He didn't magically peak that year.

Federer in his 30's was dealing with a player in Djokovic at his very peak, so it was clearly not an even playing field. You don't believe that matters? Look at how Nadal has performed against Federer recently. If Nadal could not handle a 35-36 year old Federer, why was Federer expected to handle a peak Djokovic?[/QUOTE]

A lot of these arguments can get circular. If Federer can handle Nadal at 36, why couldn't he handle him at 26 when the age matchup looks better for Federer? FWIW I don't believe Federer's inability to handle Djokovic was exclusively a function of age. If he had played the 2015 USO final with the mental freedom he played the 2017 AO final Federer would have won it. He lost the match because he converted only 4/23 break points but conceded 6/13 break points on his own serve. He lost the match due to brain fade not an aging body.
 
Last edited:
metsman

metsman

G.O.A.T.
reaper said:
Murray had brilliant seasons even before 2016. He didn't magically peak that year.

Federer in his 30's was dealing with a player in Djokovic at his very peak, so it was clearly not an even playing field. You don't believe that matters? Look at how Nadal has performed against Federer recently. If Nadal could not handle a 35-36 year old Federer, why was Federer expected to handle a peak Djokovic?
Click to expand...

A lot of these arguments can get circular. If Federer can handle Nadal at 36, why couldn't he handle him at 26 when the age matchup looks better for Federer? FWIW I don't believe Federer's inability to handle Djokovic was exclusively a function of age. If he had played the 2015 USO final with the mental freedom he played the 2017 AO final Federer would have won it. He lost the match because he converted only 4/23 break points but conceded 6/13 break points on his own serve. He lost the match due to brain fade not an aging body.[/QUOTE]
yes, mind and body are completely separate. One has nothing to do with the other. Did you ever see a brain fade like that from Federer from 04-07 in a match like that?
 
Jontyg

Jontyg

Rookie
I think this stat of reaching finals obviously goes hand in hand with his 237 consecutive weeks at no. 1...holy cow..thats like 4.5 years :eek::eek:
 
R

reaper

Legend
metsman said:
A lot of these arguments can get circular. If Federer can handle Nadal at 36, why couldn't he handle him at 26 when the age matchup looks better for Federer? FWIW I don't believe Federer's inability to handle Djokovic was exclusively a function of age. If he had played the 2015 USO final with the mental freedom he played the 2017 AO final Federer would have won it. He lost the match because he converted only 4/23 break points but conceded 6/13 break points on his own serve. He lost the match due to brain fade not an aging body.
Click to expand...
yes, mind and body are completely separate. One has nothing to do with the other. Did you ever see a brain fade like that from Federer from 04-07 in a match like that?[/QUOTE]

He lost from match point up against Safin at the AO in 2005, hitting a tweener on the match point. So not often, but yes. To the more general point mind and body are separate if a player is losing as a consequence of squandering opportunites. The body is in perfect working order to create the opportunities by general level of play, the mind falters at the crucial moment in taking them. Separate things.
 
Federev

Federev

Legend
Jontyg said:
I think this stat of reaching finals obviously goes hand in hand with his 237 consecutive weeks at no. 1...holy cow..thats like 4.5 years :eek::eek:
Click to expand...
Yup. And when he's not able to maintain consistency... sadly we have to settle for 306 weeks total and 20 GS total.
GOAT.
GOATER.
GOATERER.
 
F

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
reaper said:
He lost from match point up against Safin at the AO in 2005, hitting a tweener on the match point. So not often, but yes. To the more general point mind and body are separate if a player is losing as a consequence of squandering opportunites. The body is in perfect working order to create the opportunities by general level of play, the mind falters at the crucial moment in taking them. Separate things.
Click to expand...

I think what we all tend to forget is that Fed seemed destined for a good few years to be one of those "talented but too fragile ever to make it" type players. It's not surprising that he has mental lapses at times - it's just incredible that he should have won so much despite that.
 
metsman

metsman

G.O.A.T.
reaper said:
He lost from match point up against Safin at the AO in 2005, hitting a tweener on the match point. So not often, but yes. To the more general point mind and body are separate if a player is losing as a consequence of squandering opportunites. The body is in perfect working order to create the opportunities by general level of play, the mind falters at the crucial moment in taking them. Separate things.
Click to expand...
Yes, blowing a bunch of break points with UFE after UFE and missing one very difficult shot on match point is the same thing.
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
Slam finalists by birth year:

1977 Clement (1)
1978 Verkerk (1) Gaudio (1) Puerta (1)
1979
1980 Safin (4) Ferrero (3) Gonzalez (1)
1981 FEDERER (30) Hewitt (4)
1982 Roddick (5) Nalbandian (1) Coria (1) Ferrer (1)
1983
1984 Soderling (2)
1985 Wawrinka (4) Baghdatis (1) Tsonga (1) Berdych (1)
1986 NADAL (23) Anderson (1)
1987 DJOKOVIC (21) Murray (11)
1988 Cilic (3), Del Potro (1)
1989 Nishikori (1)
1990 Raonic (1)
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
1977-84 excluding Federer: 24 slam finals
1984-90 excluding Nadal: 48 slam finals
1984-90 excluding Djokovic: 50 slam finals

Weak era exposed.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
reaper said:
Murray had brilliant seasons even before 2016. He didn't magically peak that year.

Federer in his 30's was dealing with a player in Djokovic at his very peak, so it was clearly not an even playing field. You don't believe that matters? Look at how Nadal has performed against Federer recently. If Nadal could not handle a 35-36 year old Federer, why was Federer expected to handle a peak Djokovic?

A lot of these arguments can get circular. If Federer can handle Nadal at 36, why couldn't he handle him at 26 when the age matchup looks better for Federer? FWIW I don't believe Federer's inability to handle Djokovic was exclusively a function of age. If he had played the 2015 USO final with the mental freedom he played the 2017 AO final Federer would have won it. He lost the match because he converted only 4/23 break points but conceded 6/13 break points on his own serve. He lost the match due to brain fade not an aging body.
Click to expand...
Mind has everything to do with body. Why do you think he even had those mental hurdles? Because he knew that his aging body would not allow him to grind against a peak Djokovic over 5 sets. So every opportunity needed to count. And that put a lot of pressure on him.

Yes, Federer played with a lot of mental freedom against Nadal in the 2017 AO, because at that point he was mentally and physically refreshed and had nothing to lose. Plus he hadn't played Nadal in a long time which made his forget their past history a bit and start the match-up from scratch.

Federer while he still wasn't too old was still capable of beating Djokovic over 5 sets. What? You think he was always going to be capable of that the more he aged? Why couldn't Djokovic maintain his 2015 level the more he aged?

The Nadal comparison is very valid and not circular. Nadal when he was younger could handle Fed on a consistent basis, but all of a sudden in his 30's he has not been able to handle a 35-36 year old Fed. Now if a younger than 2015 Fed Nadal could not handle a player much older than him, why was Fed supposed to handle a younger player at the very peak of his powers?
 
metsman

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Lew said:
1977-84 excluding Federer: 24 slam finals
1984-90 excluding Nadal: 48 slam finals
1984-90 excluding Djokovic: 50 slam finals

Weak era exposed.
Click to expand...
nothing exposed other than Nadal and Djokovic being too inferior to truly dominate for an extended period, and thus letting the other rack up achievements.
 
D

Deleted member 757377

Guest
metsman said:
nothing exposed other than Nadal and Djokovic being too inferior to truly dominate for an extended period, and thus letting the other rack up achievements.
Click to expand...
30 slam finals Federer
23 Nadal
21 Djokovic

A difference that doesn't justify a 24-48-50 difference. If we give 9 extra finals to Federer's coetaneous and 2 to Nadal, we have 33-50-50.
 
R

reaper

Legend
mike danny said:
Mind has everything to do with body. Why do you think he even had those mental hurdles? Because he knew that his aging body would not allow him to grind against a peak Djokovic over 5 sets. So every opportunity needed to count. And that put a lot of pressure on him.

Yes, Federer played with a lot of mental freedom against Nadal in the 2017 AO, because at that point he was mentally and physically refreshed and had nothing to lose. Plus he hadn't played Nadal in a long time which made his forget their past history a bit and start the match-up from scratch.

Federer while he still wasn't too old was still capable of beating Djokovic over 5 sets. What? You think he was always going to be capable of that the more he aged? Why couldn't Djokovic maintain his 2015 level the more he aged?

The Nadal comparison is very valid and not circular. Nadal when he was younger could handle Fed on a consistent basis, but all of a sudden in his 30's he has not been able to handle a 35-36 year old Fed. Now if a younger than 2015 Fed Nadal could not handle a player much older than him, why was Fed supposed to handle a younger player at the very peak of his powers?
Click to expand...

If we're still talking about the 2015 USO final against Djokovic not every opportunity needed to count...he simply needed to do better than 4/23 on break points. 7/23 wins him the match. If he doesn't choke he does handle a younger player (Djokovic) at the peak of his powers...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
GOAT - excel model
2
Replies
53
Views
6K
TMF
T
VarmasPermo
Djokovic was nearly disqualified in 02 arena.
2 3 4
Replies
163
Views
11K
Tshooter
Tshooter
AO13
It's been a ride...
Replies
8
Views
480
Djokodalerer31
Djokodalerer31
NonP
Open Era ATGs' Win %s Against Fellow Slam Champions and Career H2Hs vs. the Top 10
Replies
14
Views
721
Gizo
G
mtincoronel76
WHO ARE THE 20 BEST CLAY COURT PLAYERS EVER?
2 3 4
Replies
167
Views
7K
Olli Jokinen
Olli Jokinen
Top