Djokovic closing in on Federer's big titles record

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
#15
I disagree by lumping MS1000 with the 4 Grand Slam tournaments. The majors are too great and should never mixed with any other lower tournaments.


If the MS1000 are included then the rest of the ATP tournaments should included too.

Most single titles
1. Jimmy Connors 109
2. Roger Federer 101
3. Ivan Lendl 94
4. Rafael Nadal 80
5. John McEnroe 77
6. Novak Djokovic 74
 

Lew II

Hall of Fame
#16
Djokovic is very likely to end with 2 of the 3 biggest records in tennis:

1) Slam titles
2) Time as no.1
3) Big titles


Then we have to talk about competition, dominance, results across surfaces, etc. But these three are the main achievements IMO.
 
Last edited:

Towny

Professional
#19
Djokovic is very likely to end with 2 of the 3 biggest records in tennis:

1) Slam titles
2) Time as no.1
3) Big titles


Then we have to talk about competition, dominance, results across surfaces, etc. But these three are the main achievements IMO.
Not sure slam titles and Big titles can really be considered separate records, given slam titles are part of the composite of Big titles. I don't disagree with your prediction however.
 
#21
Djokovic is very likely to end with 2 of the 3 biggest records in tennis:

1) Slam titles
2) Time as no.1
3) Big titles


Then we have to talk about competition, dominance, results across surfaces, etc. But these three are the main achievements IMO.
Not sure slam titles and Big titles can really be considered separate records, given slam titles are part of the composite of Big titles. I don't disagree with your prediction however.
I completely disagree. He’ll have all 3 for sure
 
#22
I disagree by lumping MS1000 with the 4 Grand Slam tournaments. The majors are too great and should never mixed with any other lower tournaments.


If the MS1000 are included then the rest of the ATP tournaments should included too.

Most single titles
1. Jimmy Connors 109
2. Roger Federer 101
3. Ivan Lendl 94
4. Rafael Nadal 80
5. John McEnroe 77
6. Novak Djokovic 74
Presumably the ATP website cares more about full field events which is why they don't include anything below Masters.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
#27
But his 2014 'win' was a walk over as Roger retired after his epic match against Stan in order to save himself for the Davis Cup final. So that 'record' is a fake record.
That's down to Fed, not Djokovic. If Fed wants to tank a WTF final that's his lookout. He conceded the title to Djokovic because he didn't want to fight him for it. Doesn't affect Djokovic's titles record at all.
 

Luka888

Hall of Fame
#29
I think people over react. Let's wait and see what happens. Djokovic could break all records. Will he? I don't know. It is possible.
 
#30
There are only 4 true big titles

1) Wimbledon
2) US Open
3) World Tour Finals
4) Cincinnati

These events are the events from the three big title tiers (slam, yec, masters) that have the most history due to age of event and most consistent attendance of the top players since their creating.

Things like the Australian Open are out because a significant number of people never even bothered to show up to that for decades.

What is the title count comparison out of this accurate big titles list.
 
#31
This is just a pathetic attempt by the ATP to claw for some relevance in tennis. Comparing their mickey mouse (WTF) tournaments to the ITF's slams is like comparing the cast of the big bang theory with real-life Nobel prize winners.
 
#32
There are only 4 true big titles

1) Wimbledon
2) US Open
3) World Tour Finals
4) Cincinnati

These events are the events from the three big title tiers (slam, yec, masters) that have the most history due to age of event and most consistent attendance of the top players since their creating.

Things like the Australian Open are out because a significant number of people never even bothered to show up to that for decades.

What is the title count comparison out of this accurate big titles list.
I’m sorry but Wimbledon is out. No tournament played on a continent still in the Stone Age counts. Let me know when they get electricity and no longer need mummy and daddy’s permission to stay up until midnight. Until then, get out of it. That means the last decade or so of WTFs don’t count either.
 
#33
Federer never had the Masters record, Nole has been within 1 of Roger's WTF record since winning in 2015, and was within 5 of Roger's slam record after winning RG in 2016. Nothing has changed.
Nothing has changed in terms of him catching Federer but the three slam titles both have won since then are very meaningful overall.
 
#38
The 'big titles' is a recent catch phrase used by the ATP website to garner clicks. They know bloody well the 'Masters' is a recent phenomenon.

The real things that matter are

1. Slam Count
2. Weeks at No 1
3. Overall no of titles
4, YE Titles
 

duaneeo

Hall of Fame
#40
Actually, the 'big titles' record is interesting. Tennis consists of BO5 and BO3, and the Masters and WTFs are the 'big titles' of BO3. Why not keep of record of overall 'big titles' won? Sure it doesn't rank on the level of other records, but it's an interesting one.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
#41
Well considering Masters 1000 finals are no longer best-of-5 set encounters, coupled with the fact that top players get a bye in the 1st round, it's no longer as prestigious as it once was back in the early 2000's. For instance, Djokovic only had to win 4 matches to lift the trophy in Madrid, hardly comparable to say Nadal winning Rome2006, where he had to win 6 matches including a 5 hour marathon final.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
#43
Well considering Masters 1000 finals are no longer best-of-5 set encounters, coupled with the fact that top players get a bye in the 1st round, it's no longer as prestigious as it once was back in the early 2000's. For instance, Djokovic only had to win 4 matches to lift the trophy in Madrid, hardly comparable to say Nadal winning Rome2006, where he had to win 6 matches including a 5 hour marathon final.
Well, he was scheduled to play 5 but had a walkover in 1 of them. The introduction of the 1st round bye for seeded players was to help attract the top players to participate as they were the ones who usually won or went deep in these events and there had been a growing risk of them not participating with so many Masters being played back to back which is a scheduling issue.
 

NEW_BORN

Hall of Fame
#45
Well, he was scheduled to play 5 but had a walkover in 1 of them. The introduction of the 1st round bye for seeded players was to help attract the top players to participate as they were the ones who usually won or went deep in these events and there had been a growing risk of them not participating with so many Masters being played back to back which is a scheduling issue.
Still doesn't change the fact that Djokovic only had to win 4 matches to win Madrid. I'm just calling a spade a spade.
 
#46
Presumably the ATP website cares more about full field events which is why they don't include anything below Masters.
Presumably ATP tries to promote their own events (Masters 1000 and WTF) by lumping them together with the biggest tournaments in the sport (Grand Slams), that are however governed by ITF.
Same old **** again. ATP promote itself and demote ITF. Nothing to be surprised at.
 

Druss

Hall of Fame
#47
Djokovic is very likely to end with 2 of the 3 biggest records in tennis:

1) Slam titles
2) Time as no.1
3) Big titles

Then we have to talk about competition, dominance, results across surfaces, etc. But these three are the main achievements IMO.
It's a shame Federer didn't have this p^^s weak competition back in 2012 when he climbed back to the top spot! Well good luck to Djoker... hopefully he'll make good use of this woeful period.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
#49
Not sure slam titles and Big titles can really be considered separate records, given slam titles are part of the composite of Big titles. I don't disagree with your prediction however.
I think the appropriate solution is ignoring the Slam record and only looking at big titles
 
Top