Could Federer beat Steffi Graff's record?

[2 Cent]

22 Grand Slam singles titles. the most of any man or woman in history.

Federer recently said he's planning to play for about another 10 more years.
With his 12 titles already, he could probably break Sampras record by next year(if he wins the Australian, Wimbledon, and US Open again). he'd have 15.
if he wins 2 Slams per year the next 4 years after that, he'd be on pace to break Graff's record.

do you think he could pull it off??

 

[anointedone]

The most of any player in history is 24, now 22.

 

[LarougeNY]

he said he'd play for 10 more years. For how many of those can he stay at the top of the game, and win grand slams even on his C- game? I'm a huge fed fan, and I hope he keeps this pace up till hes 30 at least, but even I know thats not a safe bet.

 

[2 Cent]

oh really? my bad. who had 24?

 

[boojay]

Margaret Court?

 

[natasha_nana]

yes it was margaret court.
Of which 11 were AOs...but still...she did win 24, and she did win all four of the GSs at least once.

as to the OP - could he? sure...but will he?...I honestly dont think so tbh.
But you never know I guess.

 

[djsiva]

Federer has maybe 2- 3 more good years

At most.

Guys are already catching on to his game. There is no way he'll play ten more years.

Henman said after Wimlbedon that he'll be back next year and see what happened.

Sampras never talked about beating records. Federer when you talk to him will tell you how many times and how pretty easy it is to beat somebody, with his body language and words. Watch how he talked about Davedenko before he put down.

As for Nadal I don't think he'll win the french next year. So maybe Federer has a chance.

 

[quest01]

I dont know if Federer will break 22 grand slams but i would have to say Federer's accomplishments are much greater then Graffs because of the fact that she had little competition during her playing days. Its much easier winning 22 grand slams when you have hardly any rivals.

 

[The tennis guy]

First, posters degrade WTA to the worst imaginable, second, now let's talk about whether a guy on ATP can break WTA record?

 

[clymb420]

do you think he could pull it off??

...............yes

If he stayed in perfect health and as motivated, yes.

If he begins to fall off at all, maybe a good coach could help him with whatever he is missing.

Maybe Agassi? He sounded like a tennis guru while commenting on the Roddick match.

 

[edmondsm]

Even if he played for another 10 years, he would have to win a slam a year to reach 22. It's tough to see a guy in his 30's winning a slam or more every year. He is extremely durable and dominant, but his body has to start showing signs of aging eventually.

I bet he retires in the high teens. Probably 18 or 19 slams. I'll say 5 Aussies, 1 FO, 8 Wimbys, 5 USO's.

 

[Topaz]

First, posters degrade WTA to the worst imaginable, second, now let's talk about whether a guy on ATP can break WTA record?

Roger is a far way off from Graf's and Court's records, and Nadal is still far away from Evert's record of consecutive clay court wins.

Interesting how the women's records are so much longer than the men's records.

 

[Jack the Hack]

Connors played on the tour until he was almost 40, and Agassi would probably still be playing at 36 if his back hadn't given out.

If Federer doesn't develop a dibilitating injury, I see no reason why he couldn't play into his late 30s. If you look at most other major professional sports (soccer, basketball, track, baseball, etc), those athletes usually hit their peaks between 28-32, but continue to play at a high level until 36-40 if they can stay injury free. The key is that you have to work really, really hard to keep your edge in your late 30s, and most tennis players do not have the mental or emotional desire to sacrifice that much at that point in their careers. For most, it's not a physical problem, but a motivational one.

I don't think that Federer will win 24+ Slam titles, but I do think he will play into his 30s and retire with the all-time GS record for men.

 

[2 Cent]

i have a feeling, due to Roger's comment on playing for another 10 years, that he's thinking about beating Graff and Court's total grand slam records.
i wouldn't be surprised if it's on his mind in a serious way. it's a definite possibility and a true challenge and way of motivating himself to keep dominating.

 

[Freedom]

10 years? I thought he was planning on playing through 2012...but either way, I don't think he can get 24. I'm pretty sure he'll pass Sampras, maybe even next year, but 24? That's a little crazy...

 

[tennis_hand]

don't compare the men to the women. steffi graff is good, but the women's games have never been as competitive as the men's.

 

[Pancho]

As for Nadal I don't think he'll win the french next year. So maybe Federer has a chance.

Haha, I don't think so. Nadal will win French Open and spoil Federer's chance of ever completing a grand slam. The only thing you can ever hoep for is that Nadal gets injured and doesn't play French Open, then maybe Federer will win French Open, even then is not even a shoe-in as he has lost to other lower ranked players on clay before. European Rec Clay is Federer's worst surface.

It is possible that Federer can beat both Steffi Graf of 22 & Margaret Court's record of 24 grand slams. He is by far the best player so far.

 

[Stinkdyr]

If someone shanks Nada like Seles, then Fed can win a few FO's to add to his collection of cows and trophies.

 

[natasha_nana]

Interesting how the women's records are so much longer than the men's records.

Just as there are many many more women who have won all 4 GS than there have been men.

 

[bluedevil]

At most.

Guys are already catching on to his game. There is no way he'll play ten more years.

Really? You make it sound like Fed reached as high as he could go? Fed isnt going to improve? Fed is a very tactical player and adjusts to competition on the court - so this "catching up" is all perception and doesnt hold substance!

 

[Ossric]

Roger is a far way off from Graf's and Court's records, and Nadal is still far away from Evert's record of consecutive clay court wins.

Interesting how the women's records are so much longer than the men's records.

That is because the best women at that time were so much more skilled than the rest of the field.

There has been a huge surge in young female talent of late which will make any of the old streaks difficult to beat.

 

[2 Cent]

If someone shanks Nada like Seles, then Fed can win a few FO's to add to his collection of cows and trophies.

sad but true.

that's messed up.

where's Gunther Parche(or whatever his name was) when you need him? just kidding!

 

[Plamen1234]

He can reach Graff record but I am not sure about breaking it.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

The Witch doesn't have the record anymore. All hail Queenrena!

 

[TheMaestro1990]

Federer has maybe 2- 3 more good years

At most.

Guys are already catching on to his game. There is no way he'll play ten more years.

Henman said after Wimlbedon that he'll be back next year and see what happened.

Sampras never talked about beating records. Federer when you talk to him will tell you how many times and how pretty easy it is to beat somebody, with his body language and words. Watch how he talked about Davedenko before he put down.

As for Nadal I don't think he'll win the french next year. So maybe Federer has a chance.

Maybe one of the worst posts in TTW history. Nadal went on to win FO next year, being more dominant than ever, beating Fed in the final, leaving him four games. And about Federer? Ha!

 

[enlightenment]

Even if he played for another 10 years, he would have to win a slam a year to reach 22. It's tough to see a guy in his 30's winning a slam or more every year. He is extremely durable and dominant, but his body has to start showing signs of aging eventually.

I bet he retires in the high teens. Probably 18 or 19 slams. I'll say 5 Aussies, 1 FO, 8 Wimbys, 5 USO's.

Impressive guess! This was fed’s tally 2 months ago.

 

[KINGROGER]

Maybe one of the worst posts in TTW history. Nadal went on to win FO next year, being more dominant than ever, beating Fed in the final, leaving him four games. And about Federer? Ha!

Exactly lol. Who was catching on to his game? He’d just won his 3rd grand slam of the year.

 

[fedfan39]

Exactly lol. Who was catching on to his game? He’d just won his 3rd grand slam of the year.

To be honest, I disagree. The signs were clear in 2007 that Nadal and Djokovic were on Federer's heels.

Nadal gave Fed a 5 setter Wimbledon and Djokovic just blundered away the USO final. I remember the impression I still have from that final. Djokovic was playing better from the baseline but he made too many mistakes and simply choked away his first GS final.

Also, Federer's reign on Masters tournaments was over. He lost to Canas of all people at both IW and Miami - those two tournaments were won by Nadal and Djokovic. He couldn't take Nadal for a 3rd consecutive year at clay. Couldn't put away a brilliant Djokovic at the Rogers cup final. It was very clear that Nadal and Djokovic were charging and Federer was either bored or was just unable to stop the charge.

I know Fed had mono in 2008, but Djokovic and Nadal both caught up with him. It took a couple of more years, but they had surpassed him by mid 2010. So those posters actually made a very accurate prediction.

What they obviously couldn't predict was how 2017 turned out and how 2018 is shaping up. No one could have predicted this.

 

[KINGROGER]

To be honest, I disagree. The signs were clear in 2007 that Nadal and Djokovic were on Federer's heels.

Nadal gave Fed a 5 setter Wimbledon and Djokovic just blundered away the USO final. I remember the impression I still have from that final. Djokovic was playing better from the baseline but he made too many mistakes and simply choked away his first GS final.

Also, Federer's reign on Masters tournaments was over. He lost to Canas of all people at both IW and Miami - those two tournaments were won by Nadal and Djokovic. He couldn't take Nadal for a 3rd consecutive year at clay. Couldn't put away a brilliant Djokovic at the Rogers cup final. It was very clear that Nadal and Djokovic were charging and Federer was either bored or was just unable to stop the charge.

I know Fed had mono in 2008, but Djokovic and Nadal both caught up with him. It took a couple of more years, but they had surpassed him by mid 2010. So those posters actually made a very accurate prediction.

What they obviously couldn't predict was how 2017 turned out and how 2018 is shaping up. No one could have predicted this.

It also coincided with Federer’s own decline. Still, he beat Djokovic many times since then. It’s only since 2014 really that he stopped Fed regularly at the slams.

 

[Pheasant]

Federer started slipping in 2007. And it wasn’t because of Nadal. Federer was only 68-9 that year. Cañas and Nalbandian knocked Federer out of Masters tourneys twice each. Excluding Nadal, Fed was still only 65-7. The year before, Fed was 92-5. Take out Nadal and he was 90-1 in 2006. I.e, nobody outside of Nadal was beating Fed. By 2007,Cañas and Nalbandian were beating Fed twice each. By 2008, Fed was 7-10 vs top 10.

The peakiest of Fed was November of 2003 until February of 2007, where Federer was an amazing 62-6 vs the top 10. Excluding Nadal, he was 60-1 vs the top 10.

It is insane that 2007 was a year that Fed slippped a little in performance, considering that he still won 3 slams.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Federer started slipping in 2007. And it wasn’t because of Nadal. Federer was only 68-9 that year. Cañas and Nalbandian knocked Federer out of Masters tourneys twice each. Excluding Nadal, Fed was still only 65-7. The year before, Fed was 92-5. Take out Nadal and he was 90-1 in 2006. I.e, nobody outside of Nadal was beating Fed. By 2007,Cañas and Nalbandian were beating Fed twice each. By 2008, Fed was 7-10 vs top 10.

The peakiest of Fed was November of 2003 until February of 2007, where Federer was an amazing 62-6 vs the top 10. Excluding Nadal, he was 60-1 vs the top 10.

It is insane that 2007 was a year that Fed slippped a little in performance, considering that he still won 3 slams.

Those defeats to Canas prompted Sewretch to call for Fed's retirement. 2008 was even worse. His first ever defeat or something to Blake. Lost to Karlovic too IIRC at Cincy. In 2007, he was slipping but still had the aura of the reigning champion and clutched out wins at the majors. In 2008, that aura was gone.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

To be honest, I disagree. The signs were clear in 2007 that Nadal and Djokovic were on Federer's heels.

Nadal gave Fed a 5 setter Wimbledon and Djokovic just blundered away the USO final. I remember the impression I still have from that final. Djokovic was playing better from the baseline but he made too many mistakes and simply choked away his first GS final.

Also, Federer's reign on Masters tournaments was over. He lost to Canas of all people at both IW and Miami - those two tournaments were won by Nadal and Djokovic. He couldn't take Nadal for a 3rd consecutive year at clay. Couldn't put away a brilliant Djokovic at the Rogers cup final. It was very clear that Nadal and Djokovic were charging and Federer was either bored or was just unable to stop the charge.

I know Fed had mono in 2008, but Djokovic and Nadal both caught up with him. It took a couple of more years, but they had surpassed him by mid 2010. So those posters actually made a very accurate prediction.

What they obviously couldn't predict was how 2017 turned out and how 2018 is shaping up. No one could have predicted this.

He did look rather bored and sluggish in that Rogers Cup final. Montreal never has been a happy hunting ground for him. Ruined his US Open series last year.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

Connors played on the tour until he was almost 40, and Agassi would probably still be playing at 36 if his back hadn't given out.

If Federer doesn't develop a dibilitating injury, I see no reason why he couldn't play into his late 30s. If you look at most other major professional sports (soccer, basketball, track, baseball, etc), those athletes usually hit their peaks between 28-32, but continue to play at a high level until 36-40 if they can stay injury free. The key is that you have to work really, really hard to keep your edge in your late 30s, and most tennis players do not have the mental or emotional desire to sacrifice that much at that point in their careers. For most, it's not a physical problem, but a motivational one.

I don't think that Federer will win 24+ Slam titles, but I do think he will play into his 30s and retire with the all-time GS record for men.

Right on so many counts! Time will be the judge of the last para.

 

[kOaMaster]

Even if he played for another 10 years, he would have to win a slam a year to reach 22. It's tough to see a guy in his 30's winning a slam or more every year. He is extremely durable and dominant, but his body has to start showing signs of aging eventually.
I bet he retires in the high teens. Probably 18 or 19 slams. I'll say 5 Aussies, 1 FO, 8 Wimbys, 5 USO's.

Connors played on the tour until he was almost 40, and Agassi would probably still be playing at 36 if his back hadn't given out.
If Federer doesn't develop a dibilitating injury, I see no reason why he couldn't play into his late 30s. If you look at most other major professional sports (soccer, basketball, track, baseball, etc), those athletes usually hit their peaks between 28-32, but continue to play at a high level until 36-40 if they can stay injury free. The key is that you have to work really, really hard to keep your edge in your late 30s, and most tennis players do not have the mental or emotional desire to sacrifice that much at that point in their careers. For most, it's not a physical problem, but a motivational one.
I don't think that Federer will win 24+ Slam titles, but I do think he will play into his 30s and retire with the all-time GS record for men.

Impressive from todays view!

 

[Deleted member 756486]

Even if he played for another 10 years, he would have to win a slam a year to reach 22. It's tough to see a guy in his 30's winning a slam or more every year. He is extremely durable and dominant, but his body has to start showing signs of aging eventually.

I bet he retires in the high teens. Probably 18 or 19 slams. I'll say 5 Aussies, 1 FO, 8 Wimbys, 5 USO's.

Not bad at all.

 

[yokied]

It is insane that 2007 was a year that Fed slippped a little in performance, considering that he still won 3 slams.

Great poast and it just goes to show the simply staggering consistency of Federer in putting away lesser players. 90-1 in 06 minus Nadal. Sensational.

 

[fedfan39]

It also coincided with Federer’s own decline. Still, he beat Djokovic many times since then. It’s only since 2014 really that he stopped Fed regularly at the slams.

Agree, Fed never let Djokovic dominate him until the fall of 2014. Wish Fed had changed rackets sooner...I think he could take Djokovic out in 2014 W and 2015 USO.

That's part of Fed's greatness. Despite physical decline, Fed hung around, played at a high level and finally when conditions were right, turned around a corner and went on to win 3 slams and reclaimed #1.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

25 is the real target -- to surpass Court.

 

[mike danny]

Those defeats to Canas prompted Sewretch to call for Fed's retirement. 2008 was even worse. His first ever defeat or something to Blake. Lost to Karlovic too IIRC at Cincy. In 2007, he was slipping but still had the aura of the reigning champion and clutched out wins at the majors. In 2008, that aura was gone.

Federer getting exposed by better players in 2008 was a myth. His losing record against the top 10 that year speaks for itself.

 

[JackGates]

Even if he played for another 10 years, he would have to win a slam a year to reach 22. It's tough to see a guy in his 30's winning a slam or more every year. He is extremely durable and dominant, but his body has to start showing signs of aging eventually.

I bet he retires in the high teens. Probably 18 or 19 slams. I'll say 5 Aussies, 1 FO, 8 Wimbys, 5 USO's.

Wow, you were so close, it's freakish. I doubt you are even here today.

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

Women's GS aren't comparable to men's tbh. Difference in level is very high.