4 Slams in a row. So close yet so far...

[Megafanoftennis100]

I know "If if if doesn't exist," but still, I am just gonna go ahead and say it:

If Roger Federer had converted more of his break points at the 2007 RG final, he would've won the match and held four consecutive grand slams simultaneously (2006 WB, 2006 USO, 2007 AO, 2007 RG)
If Roger Federer had been tactically a bit smarter against Del Potro instead of being so stubborn with the forehand-to-forehand exchanges, he would've won the match and held four consecutive grand slams simultaneously (2009 RG, 2009 WB, 2009 USO, 2010 AO)

If Novak Djokovic had been more careful at the 2020 USO R4 and not shot the ball at the lineswoman's neck, he would've won the whole event (considering the abysmal final) and held four consecutive grand slams simultaneously (2020 USO, 2021 AO, 2021 RG 2021 WB)
If Novak Djokovic had taken the COVID vaccine in 2022, he would've won the US Open that year (Alcaraz's level was rather shaky during the event) and held four consecutive grand slams simultaneously (2022 WB, 2022 USO, 2023 AO, 2023 RG)

If Jannik Sinner had converted his match points at the 2025 RG final, he would've won the match and held four consecutive grand slams simultaneously (2024 USO, 2025 AO, 2025 RG, 2025 WB)

The only time in men's singles tennis that the NCYGS has been achieved on three different surfaces was all the way back in 2016 - when Novak Djokovic did it.
But I think we should know that we were SO CLOSE to having this feat repeated FIVE MORE TIMES... but also so far.

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

I will be ranking the five alternate scenarios in terms of how close they were to becoming reality:
1. Sinner RG 2025 - this one should be obvious. He was literally ONE POINT AWAY from winning the tournament. And I genuinely do not see him losing this year's Wimbledon.
2. Djokovic USO 2020 - I know some people might say that Federer USO 2009 should come before this, but imho Del Potro truly played great in the final and the match was a close five setter, suggesting that the two players were pretty much neck-and-neck during the match. OTOH Djokovic absolutely could have won the 2020 US Open, considering just how shockingly bad the level of Zverev and Thiem was in the final. I mean, I think we can all agree that even the 2019 version of Federer would've beaten those two in the final, for real.
3. Federer USO 2009
4. Djokovic USO 2022 - I know some people may disagree with me here, due to the fact that Djokovic did not even play a single match here, but I truly believe Djokovic would've won this US Open, had he been allowed to play. The field in 2022 was incredibly weak, and the best player in the entire event was Carlos Alcaraz, who, at that time, was still only 19 and far from his peak. And the H2H between a 36-37 year old Djokovic and a more mature version of Alcaraz on HC is 2-0 in favor of Djokovic.
5. Federer 2007 RG - it is true that Federer missed a ton of break points in the final, but considering that his opponent was literally the undisputed king of Roland Garros, who was still an absolute beast on clay in 2007, I would say that this loss feels less like a "missed opportunity."

 

[Racquet_smash]

Federer beating Nadal at 07 FO? That was basically peak Nadal, the match wasn't even particularly close. The 06 one was more open.

 

[NonP]

Agreed, Fraud has zero chance of beating '07 Bull at RG. Guaranteed Bull would've come roaring back regardless.

And Djoker has nobody to blame but himself for that tantrum at the '20 USO. Didn't he avoid another close call with a linesperson earlier at that very event? At the very least that was another recent occurrence. One of the textbook FAFO cases.

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

Federer beating Nadal at 07 FO? That was basically peak Nadal, the match wasn't even particularly close. The 06 one was more open.

Yes I can understand why you'd say that, but to be fair, Federer missed an unbelievable number of break points in that match. He only managed to convert 1/17 break point opportunities!
He had SEVENTEEN break points in the match! While I agree that Nadal was still the favourite to win that match, you can't seriously tell me that the match "wasn't even particularly close."

 

[weakera]

Yes I can understand why you'd say that, but to be fair, Federer missed an unbelievable number of break points in that match. He only managed to convert 1/17 break point opportunities!
He had SEVENTEEN break points in the match! While I agree that Nadal was still the favourite to win that match, you can't seriously tell me that the match "wasn't even particularly close."

You realize that it's not like those 17 break points were held in 17 different Nadal service games?

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

Agreed, Fraud has zero chance of beating '07 Bull at RG. Guaranteed Bull would've come roaring back regardless.

And Djoker has nobody to blame but himself for that tantrum at the '20 USO. Didn't he avoid another close call with a linesperson earlier at that very event? At the very least that was another recent occurrence. One of the textbook FAFO cases.

Yes I agree with you, although, to be fair, "has nobody to blame but himself" is basically what this entire thread is all about.
Federer has no one but himself to blame for being so stubborn with sticking to a poor tactic against Del Potro at USO 2009.
Djokovic also has no one but himself to blame for refusing to take the COVID vaccine, which would've allowed him to play all events freely.
Sinner has no one but himself to blame for missing some very easy shots at the match points at RG this year.

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

You realize that it's not like those 17 break points were held in 17 different Nadal service games?

yes I know that, but still, they spanned across several Nadal service games, which would've been enough to allow Federer to at least push the match to a 5 setter.

 

[weakera]

yes I know that, but still, they spanned across several Nadal service games, which would've been enough to allow Federer to at least push the match to a 5 setter.

You can't apply a what if to 17 points. That becomes "I was outplayed," not "I was unlucky."

 

[ForehandCross]

The only RG version that probably Fraud or anyone would have had any chance of beating was 2005. And even that for Fraud it will be like less than 10% chance. 2005 Fred lost.

2006 is somewhat suspect with a weaker serve but he went into complete energizer bunny mode.

2007 onwards is pure clay god stuff and no body was beating him.

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

The only RG version that probably Fraud or anyone would have had any chance of beating was 2005. And even that for Fraud it will be like less than 10% chance. 2005 Fred lost.

2006 is somewhat suspect with a weaker serve but he went into complete energizer bunny mode.

2007 onwards is pure clay god stuff and no body was beating him.

Except for 2025 Jannik Sinner at 100%

 

[NonP]

Yes I can understand why you'd say that, but to be fair, Federer missed an unbelievable number of break points in that match. He only managed to convert 1/17 break point opportunities!
He had SEVENTEEN break points in the match! While I agree that Nadal was still the favourite to win that match, you can't seriously tell me that the match "wasn't even particularly close."

This is clay, not grass or even hard. 1 break of serve means nothing. Moreover:

Post in thread 'Nadal 2005 and alcaraz 2022 season similarities'

May 9, 2022

Thank you for this. The eye test obviously reveals that Nadal was substantially stronger in 2005 than Alcaraz is currently but it's nice to see the numbers that confirm it.

65.1% lol.... UNreal

Your boy was basically ready to go from the get-go. Granted with just 57.9% in '04 he'd be no shoo-in for RG that year even if healthy, but I still remember Goran (who's actually an astute student of the game, despite his recent pro-Novak bluster) predicting great things for Bull after their meeting at '04 Estoril and maybe Rafa develops even faster with more matches under his...

• NonP

• 

This was a different Bull from '05-06. There are maybe 4-5 players tops in the entire history of tennis who'd have more than a puncher's chance against that Nadal. Fed with his fast court-friendly game ain't one of 'em.

Yes I agree with you, although, to be fair, "has nobody to blame but himself" is basically what this entire thread is all about.
Federer has no one but himself to blame for being so stubborn with sticking to a poor tactic against Del Potro at USO 2009.
Djokovic also has no one but himself to blame for refusing to take the COVID vaccine, which would've allowed him to play all events freely.
Sinner has no one but himself to blame for missing some very easy shots at the match points at RG this year.

I do agree with you on Fed's faulty game plan in the '09 USO F, but I still think Delpo would've pulled it off regardless. When you study the careers of most top 1/2-Slammers it just feels like they somehow put everything together and outdid themselves during their personal-best runs - Panatta at '76 RG, Noah at '83 RG, Cash at '87 Wimby, Chang at '89 RG (probably the most famous example of 'em all), Stich at '91 W, Bruguera at '93 RG, Muster at '95 RG, Kafelnikov at '96 RG, Krajicek at '96 W, Rafter at '98 USO, Ivanisevic at '01 W, Hewitt at '01 USO, Cilic at '14 USO - and that USO run was it for Delpo. I actually predicted near the end of that summer HC season that he'd go on to spoil Fed's party and yup, that's exactly what happened!

You can't apply a what if to 17 points. That becomes "I was outplayed," not "I was unlucky."

Well put, haha.

 

[Musterrific]

Clearly Sinner will win the calendar slam next year!!

 

[RF-18]

The problem here is assuming things stay the same if you change results. You are only close if the defeat came in the tournament when you already won the 3 previous slams. So Federer in 2007 was the really actual close one in your post, and you forgot Nadal in 2011 who was going for 4 in a row at AO having won RG, Wimbledon and USO in 2010, but lost in the QF to Ferrer in AO 11. These examples are close ones. You can't assume Sinner wins Wimbledon if he converted his match points at RG.

The only one who succeded was Djokovic, who stands alone since 1938 as the only man. On the womans side Serena managed to do it, and can't remember of the top of my head if there was more from WTA.

 

[Racquet_smash]

Federer would have probably lost to Del Potro regardless. Him being too arrogant was a part of his character, it was what made him so great in several aspects and it granted him so much success over the years. He wasn't going to approach the match any differently. But still you have to give credit to the giant before everything, who tf can win a forehand contest against prime Federer besides him?

 

[MeatTornado]

I'm far from confident that Wimbledon plays out the same way if Sinner had beaten Alcaraz in Paris. It dramatically changes the motivation of both players, and would've increased the pressure on Sinner tenfold. We have no idea how they would've responded in that situation.

 

[DSH]

The only RG version that probably Fraud or anyone would have had any chance of beating was 2005. And even that for Fraud it will be like less than 10% chance. 2005 Fred lost.

2006 is somewhat suspect with a weaker serve but he went into complete energizer bunny mode.

2007 onwards is pure clay god stuff and no body was beating him.

Nadal from RG 2005 was a beast, neither Wawrinka from 2015 nor Alcaraz from 2025 would have been able to beat him.

 

[Hitman]

Nadal from RG 2005 was a beast, neither Wawrinka from 2015 nor Alcaraz from 2025 would have been able to beat him.

@Sport Untestable, therefore unprovable.

 

[SonnyT]

Yes I can understand why you'd say that, but to be fair, Federer missed an unbelievable number of break points in that match. He only managed to convert 1/17 break point opportunities!
He had SEVENTEEN break points in the match! While I agree that Nadal was still the favourite to win that match, you can't seriously tell me that the match "wasn't even particularly close."

Federer lost a lot of slam matches where he converted very few break points, like US '09 and '15! It was the pain of being a Federer fan!

 

[MichaelNadal]

Federer lost a lot of slam matches where he converted very few break points, like US '09 and '15! It was the pain of being a Federer fan!

And on the flip side, Nadal was GOATY at breaking his opponent from them being 40-0 up

 

[helterskelter]

Agreed, Fraud has zero chance of beating '07 Bull at RG. Guaranteed Bull would've come roaring back regardless.

And Djoker has nobody to blame but himself for that tantrum at the '20 USO. Didn't he avoid another close call with a linesperson earlier at that very event? At the very least that was another recent occurrence. One of the textbook FAFO cases.

Glad to see you are still calling Bull by his proper name, but want to make sure that you are referring to the Calf as the Calf or at least Calf rather than some absurd moniker such as Carlos or Carlitos or any other non-bovine referent.

 

[helterskelter]

And on the flip side, Nadal was GOATY at breaking his opponent from them being 40-0 up

I didn't notice that, but I did notice him very often holding serve from 0-40 down, such as in the 4-4 game in the third set of the 2013 US Open final or the 3-4 game of the fourth set of the 2012 Australian Open final, IIRC. And I think there were lots of other examples. Those are just two very high-profile ones against extremely tough opposition.

 

[TheFifthSet]

And Djoker has nobody to blame but himself for that tantrum at the '20 USO. Didn't he avoid another close call with a linesperson earlier at that very event? At the very least that was another recent occurrence. One of the textbook FAFO cases.

He had several in 10+ years preceding that incident.

Funny thing is that I was raising alarm bells long before things came to a head, and then when something bad finally happened a few people told me “it’s easy to say after the fact”

 

[Technology Ruined Tennis]

You realize that it's not like those 17 break points were held in 17 different Nadal service games?

Break Points
Nadal 4/10 (7 games)
Federer 1/17 (6 games)

Credit to @Waspsting from the match report.

 

[Racquet_smash]

Break Points
Nadal 4/10 (7 games)
Federer 1/17 (6 games)

Credit to @Waspsting from the match report.

Worth noting Federer only had 1 bp between set 3 and 4. These 2 sets were not close.

 

[Mustard]

According to Waspsting's report on the 2007 French Open final, Federer was 1/17 on break points and lost those 16 via almost every way possible:

1 from a Nadal ace
5 from return errors by Federer
2 from Nadal winners
3 from forced errors by Federer off the forehand side
2 from unforced errors by Federer off the forehand side
5 from unforced errors by Federer off the backhand side

The majority were in set 1, where Federer had 10 break points and failed with all of them. Nadal won that set 6-3.

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

The problem here is assuming things stay the same if you change results. You are only close if the defeat came in the tournament when you already won the 3 previous slams. So Federer in 2007 was the really actual close one in your post, and you forgot Nadal in 2011 who was going for 4 in a row at AO having won RG, Wimbledon and USO in 2010, but lost in the QF to Ferrer in AO 11. These examples are close ones. You can't assume Sinner wins Wimbledon if he converted his match points at RG.

The only one who succeded was Djokovic, who stands alone since 1938 as the only man. On the womans side Serena managed to do it, and can't remember of the top of my head if there was more from WTA.

Mate, did you even watch Wimbledon this year? Sinner was comprehensively dominating everyone (apart from Dimitrov who would've retired due to injury anyway, so he doesn't really matter).

 

[gamelovergold]

Sinner if he had won FO would have been under different pressure. It is not given that Sinner was going to win WIM. In hindsight you can become wise but who thought that Sinner will reach FO finals so easily.