mike danny
Bionic Poster
No. The Nalbandian won was the 25th one, which he lost.
Which of Federer's important records will stand the test of time?
Another Tourist
New User
- 8 Wimbledons;
- The only player who defeated Djokovic at each GS;
- The only player who defeated Djokovic at each GS;
P
PETEhammer
Guest
Well, a cornerstone of human and thought is that the individual does not in fact know everything, and as such must investigate reality to the greatest of his awareness to broaden his perspective. You will find this premise in the works of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Avicenna, Aquinas, Hafez, Rumi etc. Once the Truth-Seeker becomes aware of a truth that contradicts his opinion, he lets go of his false belief and accepts a greater Reality.Evidence which you weren't aware of, I wonder why...lolllll
By contrast, a the cornerstone of fanaticism is to believe one knows everything and shame others for their ignorance.
Sampras beat the GOAT and you're not aware of it
. Dude, at some point in life you have to stop lying and start being a little more honest with yourself and even with online posting. Because you sound ridiculous.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
Yes I was unaware, because it did not happen. Sampras cannot play himself.Sampras beat the GOAT and you're not aware of it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_superposition
That's interesting so you think Sampras > Djokodal. Keep going.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
I can see you have no interest in truth, but rather petty point scoring. Good-day.
lol, rendered into submission, love it.
BGod
G.O.A.T.
My list has stayed pretty damn consistent past several years.
1. Slam Semifinal Streak (23)
2. Slam Finals Streak (10)
3. Five Consecutive USO Titles
4. Five Consecutive Wimbledon Titles
5. 237 Consecutive Weeks at #1
It's usually streaks that stand the test of time in sport. Any volume stat is vulnerable for a variety of reasons, streaks require consistency and time.
I have the USO above Wimbledon because Borg also did 5 and Pete had 4, nobody other than Fed went above 3.
The consecutive weeks at #1 is terribly underrated I think because of Novak. But too many might not realize this is the actual top 5 in that department:
1. Federer 237
2. Connors 160
3. Lendl 157
4. Djokovic 122
5. Sampras 102
Now obviously changing Slam format to Bo3 and/or adding a 5th Slam will make those streaks easier to break but at the same time there will probably be more upsets as well.
The WTF tally of 6 is quietly looking solid as well.
1. Slam Semifinal Streak (23)
2. Slam Finals Streak (10)
3. Five Consecutive USO Titles
4. Five Consecutive Wimbledon Titles
5. 237 Consecutive Weeks at #1
It's usually streaks that stand the test of time in sport. Any volume stat is vulnerable for a variety of reasons, streaks require consistency and time.
I have the USO above Wimbledon because Borg also did 5 and Pete had 4, nobody other than Fed went above 3.
The consecutive weeks at #1 is terribly underrated I think because of Novak. But too many might not realize this is the actual top 5 in that department:
1. Federer 237
2. Connors 160
3. Lendl 157
4. Djokovic 122
5. Sampras 102
Now obviously changing Slam format to Bo3 and/or adding a 5th Slam will make those streaks easier to break but at the same time there will probably be more upsets as well.
The WTF tally of 6 is quietly looking solid as well.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Every single important one.
Forehanderer
Professional
None to please Nadalovic trolls. Be happy with your doritos and beer while Fed is living it up with his family, money, million dollar house, and not to mention his tennis achievements
mike danny
Bionic Poster
So far, his WTF record is looking pretty safe. I sure didn't think that 5 years ago. But Djokovic hasn't won any of these since 2015. And I don't think he has it in him to handle the younger guys at the WTF at his advanced age.
Fed is the oldest WTF winner at 30 and I think this is very telling.
Fed is the oldest WTF winner at 30 and I think this is very telling.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
A good list. And good observation about streaks, probably why Pete's 6 consecutive year-end #1s is still unbroken.
ForehandRF
Legend
Goran should thank Federer for beating Sampras, otherwise no Wimbledon title for him.Roddick couldn't catch a break of Federer, in the 2000s.Of course you won't
Roddick had plenty of opportunity to be a Wimbledon champion, both in his actual final v his Master Fed, and the year right after. His failure is on him. Goran by contrast toughed it out well past his prime showing he was actually a true potential multi-time Wimbledon champ were it not for Petros. And Goran, unlike Roddick, had the game to beat the dominant Wimbledon champ, but was denied by the dominant Champ's greater clutchness.
With Roddick, any half-decent Fed showed up and he was toast.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
2010 and 2011, not to mention he could and should have own the match in 2009.
ForehandRF
Legend
2010-2011 were not an option after such a crushing loss in 2009.He wasted his best chance and his dream of winning Wimbledon ended.
Nadal_King
Hall of Fame
Rf 36 set streak at slams will never be broken again it seems unless off course Rafa again gathers steam to win another rg without dropping a set and storms into sf at Wimbledon (unlikely)
P
PETEhammer
Guest
nope, he had a great shot in 2010 but blew it to a newbie.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
The God of the Smurfs
ForehandRF
Legend
At least be a level headed troll if you still want to put on display you trolling abilities.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
This is very level headed. He quantified the Weak Era, and was kind enough to call it that rather than its name: Vacuum Era
Jokervich
Hall of Fame
Some of his consecutive records may never be broken, or not broken for a very long time eg. consecutive slam semi finals, consecutive weeks at #1. But who really cares about those records? It's the total counts that matter, not how many happened in a row. And I cannot see any of those records standing. They will be beaten by Nadal/Djokovic.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
I've been thinking a lot about this since starting the thread actually and have come to the same conclusion. I remember when Fed was chasing Pete, no one cared about consecutive weeks at #1, or 5 Wimbledons in a row, but total slams and weeks. I wonder if this whole obsession with streaks is just the media dangling a shiny object in front of our faces to get us hyped on tennis
Garro
Rookie
Not sure why Wimbledon 2010 is being brought into this.
Roddick would have had to have beaten Djokovic, Berdych playing the best tennis of his career, and then Rafa in the final. Hardly a cakewalk.
At any rate, winning two different slams will have to stand as his most important, lasting record, barring Rafa winning 6 in a row at the French.
Then followed by the 237 consecutive weeks at #1, and then probably his record consecutive wins on hard courts and grass courts.
Roddick would have had to have beaten Djokovic, Berdych playing the best tennis of his career, and then Rafa in the final. Hardly a cakewalk.
At any rate, winning two different slams will have to stand as his most important, lasting record, barring Rafa winning 6 in a row at the French.
Then followed by the 237 consecutive weeks at #1, and then probably his record consecutive wins on hard courts and grass courts.
Last edited:
P
PETEhammer
Guest
Djokovic was nowhere near peak, Berdych was very beatable, and so was Rafa (Roddick beat him in Miami that year). Nobody said it was a cakewalk, but he didn't have to face Fed, and he choked that chance away.
Anyways, I think the streak records are a bit overrated, though not sure if I'd go so far as to say they're not important.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
LMAO
Who was his main challenger? Nadal who was losing to anyone off clay? Pigeon Roddick who had like a 0-20 record against 04-07 Fed ? Baby gluten Djokovic?
Djokovic had 5 straight seasons with 10,000+ ATP points facing prime Nadal, Federer and Murray. That sort of stat puts the 237 weeks won vs clowns into perspective.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
All of them.
PeoplesChamp
Legend
The record for most records. Anyone said that yet?
P
PETEhammer
Guest
Which is actually none of them, so without trying to you said something not only true, but also meaningful and deep.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Don't be jelly cause Fed is the greatest to ever play. Fed has all the top records. Most sets in a row, most consecutive weeks at number one, most WC titles, and has the h2h vs Sampras.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Also Fed has most match wins.
PeoplesChamp
Legend
Fed breaks records sitting at home.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Fed is by far the greatest player ever. Will always be recognized as so too.
PeoplesChamp
Legend
Yep the other two are great, but they ain't no Federer
P
PETEhammer
Guest
not against his rivals lol
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
H2h is meaningless. Fed has wins against Sampras, Agassi, Rafa, and Djoker in slams. Who else can say that?
Sunny014
Legend
Federer effectively had 10K + in 6 straight years!
In 2004 Federer had 6335 points which would be like 12600+ on the new system.
In 2005 Federer had 6725 which would be like 13,450
In 2006 Federer had 8370 which would be like 16740
In 2007 Federer had 7180 which would be 14000+
In 2008 as well Federer despite Mono still was 2nd behind Nadal's 6675 with 5530 thats like 13K vs 11K ... not bad
In 2009 Federer again 10,500+ which was quite a competitive year with Rafa having 9K and Novak 8K
In 2004 Federer had 6335 points which would be like 12600+ on the new system.
In 2005 Federer had 6725 which would be like 13,450
In 2006 Federer had 8370 which would be like 16740
In 2007 Federer had 7180 which would be 14000+
In 2008 as well Federer despite Mono still was 2nd behind Nadal's 6675 with 5530 thats like 13K vs 11K ... not bad
In 2009 Federer again 10,500+ which was quite a competitive year with Rafa having 9K and Novak 8K
BGod
G.O.A.T.
1970s: Borg
1980s: Lendl
1990s: Sampras
2000s: Federer
2010s: Djokovic
Looks like someone named Nadal loses out on musical chairs here.
NoleIsBoat
Hall of Fame
Your numbers are well off. You don’t just x2 to get the modern equivalent.
Fed’s 2008 was below 10k.
6august
Hall of Fame
No Laver. Doesn't count.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
Federer didn't dominate a decade. He dominated 4 years (04-07) and then was slowly dominated by Djokodal. His career is 2004 to present, and that's due to his own choice to keep playing. As such, the generation of 2000s is actually 2000s-20s, and one of Djokodal is the dominant player.
Sad.
P
PETEhammer
Guest
.
Last edited by a moderator:
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
I think the only important records he has are:
- Most Slam titles - tied with Nadal
- Most Wimbledon titles
- Most weeks at #1
- Most US Open titles tied with Sampras and Connors
- Most consecutive weeks at #1
I don’t consider his streaks of reaching many Slam finals, semifinals etc. that important as the legacy records that people remember in tennis history are related to winning titles or being #1 in the world. Most tennis historians also remember the head-to-head record against key rivals when comparing players from the same era.
Of the five records I consider important listed above, I think the Wimbledon titles record might be the most difficult one to surpass for a future player as it requires grass dominance for likely more than a decade to win nine titles. The Slam record and weeks at #1 will be passed soon. The US Open record is not unique already as he is tied with two others and it is possible that someone else will come along in the next two decades and beat it as the record for winning most titles at other Slams is much higher at 8, 8 and 13. Also, if there are not too many ATGs and a dominant player comes along in another weak era, the 237 consecutive weeks at #1 is less than five years of dominance which might not be hard to achieve in a weak era.
The Big 3 are all unlucky to play in an era where there were three GOAT contenders and so, they had to share the #1 records and major titles. A dominant player of a GOAT level in the future might be more lucky and have to contend only with lesser ATGs as competition in his era.
- Most Slam titles - tied with Nadal
- Most Wimbledon titles
- Most weeks at #1
- Most US Open titles tied with Sampras and Connors
- Most consecutive weeks at #1
I don’t consider his streaks of reaching many Slam finals, semifinals etc. that important as the legacy records that people remember in tennis history are related to winning titles or being #1 in the world. Most tennis historians also remember the head-to-head record against key rivals when comparing players from the same era.
Of the five records I consider important listed above, I think the Wimbledon titles record might be the most difficult one to surpass for a future player as it requires grass dominance for likely more than a decade to win nine titles. The Slam record and weeks at #1 will be passed soon. The US Open record is not unique already as he is tied with two others and it is possible that someone else will come along in the next two decades and beat it as the record for winning most titles at other Slams is much higher at 8, 8 and 13. Also, if there are not too many ATGs and a dominant player comes along in another weak era, the 237 consecutive weeks at #1 is less than five years of dominance which might not be hard to achieve in a weak era.
The Big 3 are all unlucky to play in an era where there were three GOAT contenders and so, they had to share the #1 records and major titles. A dominant player of a GOAT level in the future might be more lucky and have to contend only with lesser ATGs as competition in his era.
Sunny014
Legend
Federer will always be the GOAT while Pete the pony is forgotten, you can hate Federer all you want but he owns Pete.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Exactly.
Similar threads
