Big 3 records that will never be broken

The_Order said:
Like I said, he didn't get beaten. Had he won the title, he still wouldn't have won WIM or US in 2016 anyway.

Do you really think he wouldn't have won this year's US Open if he didn't win RG?
Click to expand...
Hard to say. I have always believed that Nadal's confidence takes a dive if he fails to win RG. So can't really say with certainty.
 
mike danny said:
Well to be fair, actually 2. 2016 too. Different reasons of course.
Click to expand...

Actually it is three. Yes, he won AO 09, but my point is, when he fails to win RG, he does not waltz in and win W or USO, which was the case in 09 also. Good thing for him, he kicked some serious tushy and took the AO at the start of the year BEFORE losing at RG. Just my way of looking at it.
 
Hitman said:
Exactly! He already won his slam for the year, before playing W and USO. 9 out 10 years it was RG. Thee three times he failed to win RG, he failed to win anything after that. You can call it poor form or whatever you want, for me, it doesn't work. He has shown me, that each time he failed to win RG, he failed to win W and USO. I simply will not buy the statement that he does not need RG in four of those years, no way, especially when he has openly admitted it always comes down to winning RG every year, and everything after that comes from the momentum. That's my opinion from what I have seen from him his whole career, lets leave it at that. ;)
Click to expand...
I agree he needs to win RG for form and confidence, but just winning RG is not enough. In 2011 he won RG, yet his mentality didn't improve even a bit-I'm pretty sure he lost both Wimbledon and USO finals before the matches even started. I think what he needs is to dominate RG, not just win it. To dominate is like in 2008, 2010 and 2017 when he didn't even drop a set on the way to the titles. In 2013 he dropped many sets, but I think this win was even bigger-he managed to beat his strongest opponent even after choking the fourth set away and already being a break down in the fifth. In 2012 he also won RG with confidence, maybe he would do well if not the injuries that forced him to miss 7 months. On the other hand in 2011 and 2014 he won RG by playing pretty bad tennis, these wins felt really lucky. And I wasn't really surprised that he didn't win anything else in these years. And the same thing can of course be said about the years when he didn't win it at all. But specifically in 2015-2016 his bad form didn't start when he didn't win RG, it started much earlier.
But anyway, confidence is important, but he still had to win this Wimbledon and USO titles. He played good tennis to win them.
 
mike danny said:
Federer's 237 consecutive weeks at no.1.

Federer's 5 consecutive titles at 2 different GS.

Federer's 8+ Wimb titles

Federer's 5+ titles at 3 different GS's.

Federer's 11 GS titles in 4 years

Nadal's 10+ RG titles

Nadal's triple la Decima

Djokovic's 6+ AO titles

Djokovic's 3 AO-IW-Miami triples

Are there others I have missed?
Click to expand...
If they keep the courts fast in Australia (which is highly unlikely unfortunately) then Federer has a chance to move ahead of Djokovic for best performed at the Australian Open if he were to win again. They would be tied at 6 titles all. But after that draw in titles is put aside, Federer's record is vastly superior to Djokovic's. (Federer next best peformances are 1 runner-up and 7 Semi-finals, Djokovic's next best performances are 3 Quarter finals).
 
Hitman said:
Federer 23 straight semis will likely last test of time, that is six years of making the semi across all surfaces without missing a slam, beating players from multiple generations, avoiding upsets, handling red lining opponents. To do something like that is just absurd. Doubt we will see it again.
Click to expand...

Agree. This was the one I was thinking of. Was scanning through the thread to see if anyone had already mentioned it.
 
Nadal retiring as slam and MS1000 title record holder. Neither will be beaten as a combination or individually. [emoji6]

Sent from my E6853 using Tapatalk
 
Hitman said:
Look. I have explained myself. You know full well I am not going to say it again and again. End of. BTW, I am going to give you that long answer you asked for regarding WWE title runs.
Click to expand...

Ok cool as long as you're not in the "ahh it doesn't mean as much because it's mostly RG" camp.

As for the WWE answer, awesome!
 
timnz said:
He has all the records in the open era. But he is way behind Drobny (over 90 clay titles) and Wilding (around 77 clay titles) in the all time lists of number of clay titles.
Click to expand...

Thanks but I refuse to believe he owns them all. That would be crazy. How about Chang winning a clay major at a younger age?
 
The_Order said:
What clay record(s) doesn't he hold? I'd be quite interested in knowing that if anyone's willing to dig it up...
Click to expand...
Well, probably the most smallest wins isn't owned by him. Muster may have a say in that.

Also youngest RG winner? That goes to Wilander or Chang.
 
How about racking up at least 11,000 ranking points each season for six consecutive years? One of Djokovic's most underrated achievements IMO.
 
timnz said:
If they keep the courts fast in Australia (which is highly unlikely unfortunately) then Federer has a chance to move ahead of Djokovic for best performed at the Australian Open if he were to win again. They would be tied at 6 titles all. But after that draw in titles is put aside, Federer's record is vastly superior to Djokovic's. (Federer next best peformances are 1 runner-up and 7 Semi-finals, Djokovic's next best performances are 3 Quarter finals).
Click to expand...
Lol, why unfortunately? It's the US Open that should be kept fast, not the Australian.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Lol, why unfortunately? It's the US Open that should be kept fast, not the Australian.
Click to expand...
Slow Australian is an historical aberration. In fact slow court tennis in general being the dominant speed is also an historical aberration* Hopefully we will come out of this period. Plexi-cushion has only been around since 2008. Rebound Ace was there from 1988-2007 - it was faster than Plexi-cushion (though Rebound ace wasn't exactly fast). For all the rest of history they were on fast grass.

having said that - if we could get the US Open back to being medium-fast again - I could tolerate (barely) the Australian Open continuing to be slow.

* Examples - Indian Wells and Miami court speeds have been measured as being nearly as slow as the clay court events in Rome and Monte Carlo!
 
timnz said:
Slow Australian is an historical aberration. In fact slow court tennis in general being the dominant speed is also an historical aberration* Hopefully we will come out of this period. Plexi-cushion has only been around since 2008. Rebound Ace was there from 1988-2007 - it was faster than Plexi-cushion (though Rebound ace wasn't exactly fast). For all the rest of history they were on fast grass.

having said that - if we could get the US Open back to being medium-fast again - I could tolerate (barely) the Australian Open continuing to be slow.

* Examples - Indian Wells and Miami court speeds have been measured as being nearly as slow as the clay court events in Rome and Monte Carlo!
Click to expand...
The slower the better IMO. Separates the wheat from the chaff.
 
You know in 100 years time, humans won't age anymore. So all these records will be easily broken, y'all are just delusional :P
 
Djokovic2011 said:
The slower the better IMO. Separates the wheat from the chaff.
Click to expand...
Well it highly advantages grinding table tennis like tennis (going side to side) and reduces the skills of players from the all court game. I have no problem with slow court tennis. Where I have a problem is that it dominates most of the year. I'd like to much more of a depth of range of surface speeds.
 
timnz said:
Well it highly advantages grinding table tennis like tennis (going side to side) and reduces the skills of players from the all court game. I have no problem with slow court tennis. Where I have a problem is that it dominates most of the year. I'd like to much more of a depth of range of surface speeds.
Click to expand...
Definitely agree on that last part. FWIW I was only referring to the AO, not all hard court tournaments.
 
toughest records to break in no particular order, Open Era

Nadal's 10 FO titles. This is probably the toughest record of them all.
Nadal's 8 straight titles at an event(Monte Carlo)
Nadal's 46 straight wins at a single tournament(Monte Carlo)
Nadal's clay court titles
Nadal's 81 consecutive wins on clay
Fed's 332 grand slam match wins overall. If #2 Djokovic won the next 13 consecutive slam titles, he'd still fall short of this record by 1 win.
9 FO titles in 10 tournaments
Federer's most matches in a year while being undefeated against top 10(18-0 vs top 10 in 2004)
Djokovic's 16950 ranking points
Federer's 18 slam finals in 19 events
Federer's 23 consecutive slam semis
Federer's 26 consecutive wins vs top 10
Federer's 65 match winning streak on grass
Federer's 56 match winning streak on hard courts
Federer's 14 Australian Open semis in 15 year span
Djokovic's 31 wins vs top 10 in one calendar year
Federer's oldest age at becoming #1
Rosewall's oldest age, winning slam title(age 37)
Federer's 3 times reached all 4 finals of a slam in a calendar year(next best is Djoker and Laver at 1)
Federer's 5 slam titles at 3 different events
Fed's 7+ finals at 3 grand slams
Fed's 6+ consecutive finals at 2 grand slams
fed's 4+ consecutive finals at 3 grand slams
 
fedtennisphan said:
Yet neither could stop 20.
Click to expand...

I was replying to a specific post about Fed having a fantastic record against Rafa & Djoker. The thread is about big 3 records that will never be beaten. I was curious if poster was having a laugh with that one because it seems to be unconnected to the thread entirely
 
BeatlesFan said:
I can see him ending with 6. I don't think he's coming back remotely to his prior level. According to Agassi, he hasn't hit a ball for 2 months and still has significant elbow isssues, so 2018 AO is not even on the table. And by 2019 AO he'll be 32 years old with a grinding, tiring, brutal style.
Click to expand...

Novak can very well transition to an Agassi-like type of playstyle to be relevant after 32. But ofcourse, that kind of playstyle would get destroyed even by a 37 year old Federer.
 
titoelcolombiano said:
I was replying to a specific post about Fed having a fantastic record against Rafa & Djoker. The thread is about big 3 records that will never be beaten. I was curious if poster was having a laugh with that one because it seems to be unconnected to the thread entirely
Click to expand...

Of course, everyone knows what this thread is about. FedHaters are having a hard time reconciling that two players couldn’t stop Federer from compiling certain records.
 
The Big3 are so good that they simply hold too many records to list (especially obscure ones).

They say records are meant to be broken. I'm not so sure all can realistically be broken. 3 of my favorite records that seem unbreakable are (in no order):

Rafa's 10x of a GS (10RG, maybe more)
Fed's 23 consecutive GS SFs
Fed's 237 consecutive weeks at #1

These 3 records are a testament to consistency, dominance, excellence, and longevity, all rolled into one.

Rafa's 10x of a GS (10RG, maybe more):
Winning 1 GS is hard enough, but to win 10 of the same GS is unreal (need 11 to record break). There are 4GS a year, but only ONE chance per year at each. Most ATGs don't even have 10 great years on tour.

Fed's 23 consecutive GS SFs:
As mentioned, most ATGs don't even have 10 great years on tour. This record essentially requires 6 'consecutive years' of amazing GS play. Realistically, an ATG career can only afford 1-2 tries max.
2nd place (Djokovic with 14) = record is 64% more.
3rd place (Lendl with 10) = record is 130% more.
4th place (Djokovic with 9).
5th place (Lendl with 6).
6th place with 5 (Nadal, Murray, Becker, Djokovic) = record is 360% more.

Fed's 237 consecutive weeks at #1:
ATGs are rare. Each likely only have one chance in an ATG career to attempt this record. This one is deceptively difficulty to break.

2nd place (Connors 160) = record is 48% more.
3rd place (Lendl 157)= record is 51% more.
4th place (Djokovic 122)= record is 94% more.
5th place (Sampras 102)= record is 132% more.
6th place and beyond, all less than 100 weeks.

Absurd stuff. :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Tennis Records That Will Likely Never Be Broken
2 3 4
Replies
187
Views
11K
Cenarius
C
mike danny
Numbers of each Big 3 member that will never be surpassed by the other 2
Replies
2
Views
565
LaVie en Rose
LaVie en Rose
mike danny
Djokovic records that will stand the test of time
Replies
49
Views
2K
rUDin 21
rUDin 21
mike danny
Nadal records that will stand the test of time
Replies
38
Views
2K
DSH
DSH
Cortana
When records are set for decades, what do we cheer for?
Replies
36
Views
1K
Candide
Candide
Back
Top