Consecutive Streaks of Federer and Nadal

[McEnroeisanartist]

How important are the consecutive streaks (overall Grand Slam finals, semifinals, and quarterfinals) in determining the greatness of Federer and Nadal?

For example: it is quite amazing that Nadal has never reached 5 or more consecutive semifinals at a Grand Slam. While Federer has done this at all four Grand Slams.

 

[dooknookem]

Another way of saying it could be "consecutive number of times not winning a tournament" because it only matters if you win. When people drop the "consecutive quarterfinals reached" streak I immediately put them on ignore.

 

[Wim]

In my book it is the win of the tournament that count.

 

[powerangle]

How important are the consecutive streaks (overall Grand Slam finals, semifinals, and quarterfinals) in determining the greatness of Federer and Nadal?

For example: it is quite amazing that Nadal has never reached 5 or more consecutive semifinals at a Grand Slam. While Federer has done this at all four Grand Slams.

Those are some "nice to have" or "interesting" stats, but they are not that important compared to actual title wins, IMO. Some minor secondary or tertiary stats, if anything...

 

[McEnroeisanartist]

So if only wins count, is it any more impressive if Federer won his 17 Grand Slams, by winning two different Grand Slams five consecutive times. Or that Federer is one of only two men to have won three different Grand Slam tournaments at least two consecutive times each.

I could definately see Nadal reaching 17 Grand Slams, but not achieving that above.

 

[zam88]

I think federer's consecutive semifinal and finals streaks are truly something to behold.

I know that Novak is currently building up a pretty sweet streak of his own... but I really think 23 consecutive semifinals and 10 consecutive finals are going to hold up for a ridiculously long time... I think it will be like Dimaggio's 56 game hitting streak someday when people retroactively look at some of the greatest most lasting records in sports.

 

[RF20Lennon]

The stats are meaningless without context. The point of these stats is just to show how ridiculously consistent Federer was.

 

[The_Order]

The stats are meaningless without context. The point of these stats is just to show how ridiculously consistent Federer was.

Looking at Nadal, since 2006 (Age 19->20), he only lost before the QF at a major on 4 occasions.

It's happened to Federer 3 times since 2004 (Age 22->23).

Both ridiculously consistent with their level of play.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Looking at Nadal, since 2006 (Age 19->20), he only lost before the QF at a major on 4 occasions.

It's happened to Federer 3 times since 2004 (Age 22->23).

Both ridiculously consistent with their level of play.

Nadal also has an even loftier streak. Winning a major for 8 years in a row.

 

[tudwell]

Another way of saying it could be "consecutive number of times not winning a tournament" because it only matters if you win. When people drop the "consecutive quarterfinals reached" streak I immediately put them on ignore.

Nadal's never won a grand slam five consecutive times. Federer's done it twice.

 

[The_Order]

Nadal also has an even loftier streak. Winning a major for 8 years in a row.

Well actually it's 9 and he's the only guy to have done it.