Another GS for Roger!!!

How many slams will Roger Federer win before retiring?

  • 0

    Votes: 29 37.2%
  • 1

    Votes: 33 42.3%
  • 2

    Votes: 11 14.1%
  • 3

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 4 or more

    Votes: 5 6.4%

  • Total voters
    78

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
#51
I highly doubt that Fed isn't winning any more slam titles. But I sure hope that I'm wrong. If Fed were to win one more slam title, then my favorite would be USO title by a whisker over the AO title.

USO title: this would break a tie with Connors and Sampras and move Fed into sole possession of the USO titles crown at 6.

AO title: A record-breaking 7th crown would likely prevent Djoker from passing him. If Fed miraculously won the 2019 AO title, then I think that he and Djoker would end up tied at 7 each. But my gut is that Fed will remain at 6 for good. Djoker will push his total up to 8.

But again, I highly doubt that Fed will win another. Nowadays, there are too many guys that can hurt Fed at slam events. This year, Fed blew a 2 set lead to Kevin Anderson at his best slam event. At the USO, he was destroyed by a bum named Millman.

Being a fan means hoping for the best. Hopefully, Fed can have one more insane run at a slam. We shall see.
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
#53
That would replace Fedovic 2011 SF as 1st on my fav moments list .
To me it would be the only thing that neatly closes the circle that began when Rafa won Wimbledon 2008.

I don’t begrudge Rafa, far from it. I greatly admire him for doing what Fed would not. He took something from Fed on that day, he took it from me as a fan of Federer.

I have always wanted it back.
 
#55
To me it would be the only thing that neatly closes the circle that began when Rafa won Wimbledon 2008.

I don’t begrudge Rafa, far from it. I greatly admire him for doing what Fed would not. He took something from Fed on that day, he took it from me as a fan of Federer.

I have always wanted it back.
It would certainly be a feeling of redemption of sorts. I feel like 2017 put a big dent in that though, for me personally. RG in my eyes, would be the cherry on top. Of course it's just a dream.
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
#56
Didn't you have it back in AO 2017?
No.

What Rafa did at Wimbledon 2008, what he did after losing in 2007, and 2006, was step on centre court again, on Fed’s Turf again, the lawns of Wimbledon again, with his clay court game, again, the only way he knew best how to play again, but, this time achieved a different result.

Rafa could have despaired after that devastating 4th set tiebreaker. He should have folded as it went late into the 5th. But he persevered and found the will to finish what he started.

AO2017 doesn’t come close to what Rafa did that day at Wimbledon. It greatly balances AO2009, but that is the extent of it for me.

I want completion in my fandom. I have never stopped wanting it.

No amount of slams or weeks at #1 or GOAT accolades would mean as much to me as seeing Federer balance out Wimbledon 2008.
 
#59
The chance of having more bad days against somebody you might look down on in round 3 etc etc. More chance of that happening. Way more than this year? I don't know, but it is another year which means 15 years in Federer years. Can't rule it out. Think it is highly unlikely now.
 
#61
Realistically, the obvious choice is zero. As much as I want another slam or two, 20 is such a perfect ending number. All I can do is hope that no one catches up to it.

But really, all I truly want is to watch him play clean, entertaining tennis. Maybe make a few more deep runs and take down some quality opponents. I just can't sit through more matches like the USO vs Millman. Anything but that, and I'll be happy.
 
#62
Realistically, the obvious choice is zero. As much as I want another slam or two, 20 is such a perfect ending number. All I can do is hope that no one catches up to it.

But really, all I truly want is to watch him play clean, entertaining tennis. Maybe make a few more deep runs and take down some quality opponents. I just can't sit through more matches like the USO vs Millman. Anyone but Zverev, and I'll be happy.
FTFY
 
#64
I am a Federer fan. Nothing would make me happier than to see Roger winning at least 2-3 GS before he retires. He is the GOAT, after all. However, based from the last 5 months of RF's play, I am trying to convince myself if he can still win another GS. If he does, I think he can win 1 more. Hopefully he can do it in either French Open or Wimbledon. I'd be the happiest if he wins at least 2-3 GS before he retires. What do you think? How many GS can he win before retiring?
Even if Nadal and Djokovic aren't in his way, it's hard to see Federer overcoming the likes of Del Potro, Cilic, Zverev, etc in back to back matches in Slams. And that's likely what he would have to deal with as he approaches age 38. I think his body is shopworn and it's getting harder to come up with the goods in Slams.
 
#65
I can't understand the hypocrisy of using age as the reason Fed lost between 2013-16 to Nole, but as an older player now and winner of 3 more Majors it isn't an issue! Idiots! :sneaky::rolleyes::(
Federer winning 3 more majors in his mid-30s says more about the rest of the tour than it does about him.

He would not have won those if a healthy 29 year old Novak had still been running around instead of being stuck in a Pepe meditation-induced elbow coma.
 
#66
Because you have no objective way to reply to me? I will copy again my arguments, to see if you have something to reply with.

Not a significant difference. You you can't bring the age excuse. Michael Jordan was dominating basketball and was the best player in the world at age 30-32 in 1993-1995, despite the fact that there were younger players. LeBron James was the best basketball player in the world at age 30-32 in 2014-2016, despite the fact that Kevin Durant was 4 years younger. Cristiano Ronaldo was the best goalscorer of the Uefa Champions League in 2014-2016 at age 30-32, even if there were younger goalscorers. Nadal and Djokovic are still winning Majors at age 31-32, even if there are younger players.

We get to see how the greatest players of all time (Jordan, James, Cristiano, Messi, Nadal, Djokovic) keep dominating their sport in their early 30s. I am sorry, but losing at age 30 and 32 has nothing to do with age but ability. And it's not like Nadal has not beaten young Federer, so the age excuse is ridiculous. Both AO 2012 and AO 2014 do help Nadal and hurt Federer.
Jordan's PPG, mins, and steals fell off from previous years beginning at 32 years old. He still had good numbers, but not quite as high in these three stats which reflect aging. Especially mins and steals. More time on the bench and less aggressive on defense.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html
 

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
#67
Federer winning 3 more majors in his mid-30s says more about the rest of the tour than it does about him.

He would not have won those if a healthy 29 year old Novak had still been running around instead of being stuck in a Pepe meditation-induced elbow coma.
True enough, but he did win those majors with Murray and Djokovic out of the picture! It was worth the 5 years it took to add to his total! :whistle: :giggle: :)
 
#68
Jordan's PPG, mins, and steals fell off from previous years beginning at 32 years old. He still had good numbers, but not quite as high in these three stats which reflect aging. Especially mins and steals. More time on the bench and less aggressive on defense.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html
More importantly, there wasn't a 5 years younger Jodan clipping at his heels.

Fed competing with Rafa/Novak isn't really the same as Jordan holding off Stockton & Malone or Shawn Kemp & Gary Payton.

Penny Hardaway & Grant Hill aren't exactly the Rafa & Djokovic to Federer's Jordan.
 
#69
I can't understand the hypocrisy of using age as the reason Fed lost between 2013-16 to Nole, but as an older player now and winner of 3 more Majors it isn't an issue! Idiots! :sneaky::rolleyes::(
Yep, only in tennis people bring the age excuse at age 30.

Michael Jordan at age 30: 32 points per game, wins the NBA and is still considered the best player in the world, even if he is facing younger players. No one brings the "age excuse" for Michael Jordan.
LeBron James at age 30: 27 points per game, still greater player than younger ones like Durant. No one brings the "age excuse" for LeBron.
Cristiano Ronaldo at age 30: scores 48 goals in La Liga, his personal record. No one brings the "age excuse" for Ronaldo.
Federer at age 30: loses against Nadal at the AO 2012 and against Djokovic at RG 2012. Federer fans bring the "age excuse", even if Federer won Wimbledon 2012 a few months later.

30 years old is a prime/optimal age to compete (unless a particular player is injured or in very bad shape). The greatest sportsmen of all time keep dominating their sport in their early 30s.
 
#71
Jordan's PPG, mins, and steals fell off from previous years beginning at 32 years old. He still had good numbers, but not quite as high in these three stats which reflect aging. Especially mins and steals. More time on the bench and less aggressive on defense.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html
No significant difference is observed in Jordan's 1992-1993 season, when he was 30. He averaged 32 points per game that season, which is more than what he averaged at age 26, 28 and 29.

Also, Jordan averaged more minutes per game at age 32 than at age 27, which reflects no significant effect of age in minutes played.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jordan
 
#72
More importantly, there wasn't a 5 years younger Jodan clipping at his heels.

Fed competing with Rafa/Novak isn't really the same as Jordan holding off Stockton & Malone or Shawn Kemp & Gary Payton.

Penny Hardaway & Grant Hill aren't exactly the Rafa & Djokovic to Federer's Jordan.
Exactly. Plus, it's a team sport where Jordan isn't doing every single thing on the court. After they went on an 8-10 pt run he could basically take a breather on the floor. It's just not comparable.
 
#74
More importantly, there wasn't a 5 years younger Jodan clipping at his heels.
Yes, there were younger players. Jordan was just better and kept dominating his sport at age 30. Same with LeBron James. Kevin Durant is 4 years younger but LeBron is just better. No one brings the "age excuse" in other sports at age 30. It is a phenomenon exclusive of some Federer fans.
 
#75
No significant difference is observed in Jordan's 1992-1993 season, when he was 30. He averaged 32 points per game that season, which is more than what he averaged at age 26, 28 and 29.

Also, Jordan averaged more minutes per game at age 32 than at age 27, which reflects no significant effect of age in minutes played.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jordan
Jordan was playing for the Birmingham Barons when he was 30 years old. He was 29 in 92-93 season with the Bulls lol. The year he was 27 is the only example that you will find where he played less mins and if I had to guess he probably had a minor injury or they won in a lot of blowouts. His mins were down after 32 and PPG and steals.
 
#76
Exactly. Plus, it's a team sport where Jordan isn't doing every single thing on the court. After they went on an 8-10 pt run he could basically take a breather on the floor. It's just not comparable.
It doesn't matter whether it is an individual or collective sport. If Jordan's stats do not decrease at age 30, his level has not significantly decreased.
 
#78
Jordan was playing for the Birmingham Barons when he was 30 years old. He was 29 in 92-93 season with the Bulls lol. The year he was 27 is the only example that you will find where he played less mins and if I had to guess he probably had a minor injury or they won in a lot of blowouts. His mins were down after 32 and PPG and steals.
No, he wasn't. His birthday was in February 1963, so most of the season he was 30. Even in the Playoffs he averaged 35 points per game at age 30, one of his better Playoff performances.
 
#80
Remember when everyone thought that he was done with 17? Well ,we the fans must appreciate that he was able to win 3 more times.

If that´s all ,he still is the greatest in my mind.
 
#82
Yes, there were younger players. Jordan was just better and kept dominating his sport at age 30. Same with LeBron James. Kevin Durant is 4 years younger but LeBron is just better. No one brings the "age excuse" in other sports at age 30. It is a phenomenon exclusive of some Federer fans.
Federer fans? No. Tennis Fans. We think like this because we have decades of evidence showing massive drop-offs in their 30s.

And I know you like to completely ignore this fact, but FYI: team sports are not the same as individual sports.

Usain Bolt is only 32, so why is he retired instead of still dominating? Michael Phelps is by far the greatest swimmer ever and he's only 33. I think it's well past time he got off the couch and back in the pool!
 
#84
AO next year could be tough though. Djokovic's form is unbelievable. But who knows? Roger rises to the occasion at times. :) If Roger will have a decent run in either FO or Wimby, we can have a good chance at USO!
I'd like him to win the USO out of all of them. However, unfortunately the USO is now slow to medium-slow court tennis, so Rogers chances aren't great.
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
#86
I feel sorry for Fed. Some of his fans are never satisfied. He's just finished winning 3 slams at 36 / 37 which was an amazing swan-song and should be enough to satisfy anyone.... but now, they want more.
I don’t want more slams. Someone above said 20 was a nice number and it is.

I just want Fed to do the one last thing and beat Rafa on clay. It doesn’t need to be for a title. I’d rather he did it at Roland Garros but it could be a SF or any stage of the tournament.

I want Fed to get past that roadblock.

It would make me happy to see him do that.
 
#87
? Roger was only 30 years old at the Austraian Open 2012 and 32 at the Australian Open 2014, while Nadal was 25 and 27. Not a significant difference. You you can't bring the age excuse. Michael Jordan was dominating basketball and was the best player in the world at age 30-32 in 1993-1995, despite the fact that there were younger players. LeBron James was the best basketball player in the world at age 30-32 in 2014-2016, despite the fact that Durant was younger. Cristiano Ronaldo was the best goalscorer of the Uefa Champions League in 2014-2016 at age 30-32, even if there were younger goalscorers. Nadal and Djokovic are still winning Majors at age 31-32, even if there are younger players.

We get to see how the greatest players of all time (Jordan, James, Cristiano, Messi, Nadal, Djokovic) keep dominating their sport in their early 30s. I am sorry, but losing at age 30 and 32 has nothing to do with age but ability. And it's not like Nadal has not beaten young Federer, so the age excuse is ridiculous. Both AO 2012 and AO 2014 do help Nadal and hurt Federer.
Nadal lost both finals, so no they don’t help him significantly.
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
#90
Because it's not "more than a few." Wimbledon 2008 and Australia 2009 are it.

The only other times were Australia 2012 & 2014 when Rafa was in him prime and Roger was in his 30s, which doesn't really help Rafa or hurt Federer, so they're not brought up often.
? Roger was only 30 years old at the Austraian Open 2012 and 32 at the Australian Open 2014, while Nadal was 25 and 27. Not a significant difference. You you can't bring the age excuse. Michael Jordan was dominating basketball and was the best player in the world at age 30-32 in 1993-1995, despite the fact that there were younger players. LeBron James was the best basketball player in the world at age 30-32 in 2014-2016, despite the fact that Durant was younger. Cristiano Ronaldo was the best goalscorer of the Uefa Champions League in 2014-2016 at age 30-32, even if there were younger goalscorers. Nadal and Djokovic are still winning Majors at age 31-32, even if there are younger players.

We get to see how the greatest players of all time (Jordan, James, Cristiano, Messi, Nadal, Djokovic) keep dominating their sport in their early 30s. I am sorry, but losing at age 30 and 32 has nothing to do with age but ability. And it's not like Nadal has not beaten young Federer, so the age excuse is ridiculous. Both AO 2012 and AO 2014 do help Nadal and hurt Federer.
I can't understand the hypocrisy of using age as the reason Fed lost between 2013-16 to a much younger Nole, but as an older player now and winner of 3 more Majors it isn't an issue! Idiots! :sneaky::rolleyes::(
For what its worth when it comes to these kinds of conversations we do need to be clear in our minds when the respective athelete is no longer in their prime, which can be a little different between them.

When it comes to tennis and the big three, while Federer may have blazed the path of being routinely competitive into his thirties - winning titles, always being in the mix, affecting every tournament he was in - the other two are showing we’re either in an era this age is beyond 30, or must be included alongside Federer as being uniquely special.

Whether they continue be as uniquely special when they’re 35 remains to be seen, if the history is anything to go by I wouldn’t put it past them.

Of course future generations may well come along and show us there’s nothing unique about any of this beyond these three being the first in the modern era to do it with such consistency, and that yes, we now just live in times where athletes have longer careers than they once did.

If events outside tennis are anything to go by, I wouldn’t be too surprised if this too were to unfold.
Jordan wasn't even playing basketball at 30 lol
Maybe the most poignant post of all. At 30, that certifiable GOAT, Jordan, wasn’t even playing.

LOL indeed.

I’m not involved in basketball forums, do they get anywhere nearly as frothy as what we seem to have here in tennis?

Post Script
I’ve alwsys found @Sport to be one of the easiest and open minded Nadal fans to have conversations with. Everyone blurts out the odd comment here and there, its bound to happen over the thousands of messages that seemingly revolve around the same topics.

Try not to get too stuck on odd comments in the forums.

Don’t miss the forest for the trees.



Postmodern era sounds like a nice term for when Zverev gets his 25 slams.

What do you guys think?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Fiero425

Hall of Fame
#91
Is there no end to the greed? He's already won three more Slams than he should have

One has to hope by this time next year, Fed is retired at 20 Slams
That's humans in a nutshell; "it's never enough!" Martha Stewart went to jail trying to save $45,000 when her empire's worth hundreds of $millions$! Trump's making more money as president even though it's against the emolument clause of the Constitution! Republicans are letting it slide for now, but that's going to change with a Dem. House in January! Sports' figures are just as bad leaving winning clubs for a money grab somewhere else not half as successful! :sneaky::unsure::rolleyes::mad:
 
Last edited:
#95
At this point (and this could change) I feel like Fed has 1 more maximum but probably none. Nadal has 2 maximum but probably 1. Djokovic I'm really not sure about but I think 2-4 more,

so Fed 20, Nadal 18 and Djokovic 17 or 18 is my best guess given the way they are all playing at the moment
That's a good prediction on the total tally of GS for these three greats!
 
#97
Fed can add one more. The key is staying healthy. It would be sweet if he wins another US open. It used to be his hunting ground- dishing out bagels to Hewitt and hitting unbelievable tweener to set up match point against Djoker...
Yes; until they made a drastic change in the surface... too bad.
 
#98
Funny thing is he secures his Grand Slam record better by not playing any of Grand Slams, or dropping out early, because, you know, he is 37.

On a Slam, give healhy Djokovic a Federer in decent form reaching second week in tournament and Federers fans traditionally applauding Djokovic on unforced errors and Djokovic will very likely win it. If Federer retires tomorrow, even Nadal might reach 20 at RG, but Djokovic will not have enough 'fuel' for 20 without Federer playing to motivate him.

And BTW, Federer already had his swan song with 3 Slams, while Djokovic was 'recovering his motivation', for 2 years. Federer even in good form and with favorable draw still has to win BO5 against Djokovic, and there is nothing that can make Djokovic 'play' like he did at ATP18 finals, on any of remainig Grand Slams of his career, against Nadal or Federer, be it finals or earlier in tournament.
Yes; the 3 greats really motivate each other. So if one of them keeps playing at a high level, we expect the other 2 to do the same. More good tennis to come!
 
Top