Fed Thread (Appreciative): Which is his most impressive record?

Otacon

Hall of Fame
24 consecutive tournament finals won :eek:

7e32.png
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Consecutive GS semi-finals sounds the most impressive to me...simply because it spans almost complete six years of time period! That to me screams pure consistency! Nobody ever got anyhwere close to that! You can pull "weak era" arguments card out of your pockets all you want, but its hard to deny that even with weak era in the field its ridiculously hard to stay so consistent, that not even once crumble and fall on one's way to the semis in nearly full six season cycle! Thats just crazy! Ten finals in a row is also imoressive, but Sampras already did that before!
Sampras didn't reach 10 major final in a row because he always lost early at RG.
 

Djokodalerer31

Hall of Fame
Sampras didn't reach 10 major final in a row because he always lost early at RG.

Can you read last page please and stop quoting this? I said in my previous massage that i acknowledged that and looked at different record, which is tenth consecutive final won in non-consecutive grand slam event!
 

Shaolin

Talk Tennis Guru
Also, Fed holds the record of consecutive 'finals' won, set at 24. That's nuts! Playing 24 tournament finals, and going 24-0? Huh?

Most dominant player's career finals won is about 66% (Fed included), so at minimum, a few losses are expected when the sample size is about 12 or so. But during this stretch of 24 finals, Fed is 100%. What!? :eek:

I love this stat and no one ever brings it up. The old record was like 12 consecutive finals won!

Still his consecutive QFs, SFs and Fs records completely blow my mind though. Truly unreal.
 

ak24alive

Legend
Marrying Mirka.

Fathering two sets of twins.
Come on man.:mad:
You had to do that!!
That was going to be my answer.:p
But just to expand on it..
Fathering two sets of twins, one set of which is identical.
Each set of twin is an independent event from the another. Hence highly unlikely for anyone to have two sets.
Probability of having 2 sets of twins(one of which is identical)= 0.015*0.0045=0.0000675.
Only 675 cases in 10 millions.:eek:
Factor in the probability of being a tennis player and that too one of the greatest of all time, if not the greatest and you are looking at a never before seen phenomenon.:cool:
Fedr.
 

Plamen1234

Hall of Fame
There are a lot to be honest.36 consecutive QFs at GS events,23 consecutive semifinals at Slams,winning 3 GS tournaments at least 5 times,staying 237 consecutive weeks as Number one and more.It is pretty hard to choose.
 

CYGS

Legend
Impressive for a GOAT to have losing h2h against not one but two of his main rivals, making his GOAThood forever in doubt.
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
I'm (right now, as I think about it) torn between that and any of 10/23/36 finals/semis/quarters.
For some reason, the 23 consecutive GS semis has always jumped out the most of those three...not exactly sure why.
18/19 consecutive finals. The one missed was a semi due to mono.

The OP used the term “accomplishment”.

I have always been torn between Federer’s record 23 consecutive semi finals and his accomplishment of 18/19 finals.

It’s probably just the word “record”, the impact and meaning of it, because I think his 18/19 accomplishment is every bit as impressive as the 23 record.

Those would be my favourites.
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
wining 2 different slams 5 consecutive times
20 slams
300+ weeks at #1
5x3
30 slam finals
23 consecutive semis
18/19 finals made
6 YEC
Raz Ols' video of his top 1000 points
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
The OP used the term “accomplishment”.

I have always been torn between Federer’s record 23 consecutive semi finals and his accomplishment of 18/19 finals.

It’s probably just the word “record”, the impact and meaning of it, because I think his 18/19 accomplishment is every bit as impressive as the 23 record.

Those would be my favourites.

That 18/19 stat is just unreal! It took DelPo 9 years to make his 2nd slam final! It's almost laughable that there was a time when Fed was making slam finals as often as some people were getting hot dinners.
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
He was 10:23 which was quite inappropriate H2H for a multi-slam winner against anyone. Not to mention that among those 10 were wins against sperm/zygote Nadal.

Wait... what year did Nadal graduate from sperm/zygote to merely boy?
 

ak24alive

Legend
Can't use this argument at all against Nadal.
A lot of damage was done by 2012. Fed turned 31 in August 2012 and by then the H2H stood at 18-10.
At the end of 2009 it was 13-7. Since then Nad has 10 wins and Fed has 8.
Even if you only consider how the H2H stood at the end of 2009(the supposed end of Fed's prime) you can see how much Nadal beat him.
Now all the talk about the red surface will begin but it's upon Fed that he has a losing H2H to Nadal because Djoker too had the red surface problem but he still has a winning H2H against Nadal. By the end of 2009 Fedal stood at 5-5 off clay. 2-1 grass for Fed. 4-3 Hard for Nad.
Now given that this was all in Federer's prime and peak, an equal H2H on his best surfaces against a non peak Hardgrassdal seems really bad.
The only argument in favour of Fed is that he has a bad matchup against Nadal but that argument can be made for the losing party of all matchups. So every loser is a good player but has a bad matchup. No.
The Fedovic rivalry can be brought down to age but the Fedal rivalry has always been Nadal's.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Can't use this argument at all against Nadal.
A lot of damage was done by 2012. Fed turned 31 in August 2012 and by then the H2H stood at 18-10.
At the end of 2009 it was 13-7. Since then Nad has 10 wins and Fed has 8.
Even if you only consider how the H2H stood at the end of 2009(the supposed end of Fed's prime) you can see how much Nadal beat him.
Now all the talk about the red surface will begin but it's upon Fed that he has a losing H2H to Nadal because Djoker too had the red surface problem but he still has a winning H2H against Nadal. By the end of 2009 Fedal stood at 5-5 off clay. 2-1 grass for Fed. 4-3 Hard for Nad.
Now given that this was all in Federer's prime and peak, an equal H2H on his best surfaces against a non peak Hardgrassdal seems really bad.
The only argument in favour of Fed is that he has a bad matchup against Nadal but that argument can be made for the losing party of all matchups. So every loser is a good player but has a bad matchup. No.
The Fedovic rivalry can be brought down to age but the Fedal rivalry has always been Nadal's.
Djokovic has a winning H2H because he got to face 2015-2016 Nadal. Fed didn't really get the same opportunity if facing a poor Nadal even on clay.
 

ak24alive

Legend
Djokovic has a winning H2H because he got to face 2015-2016 Nadal. Fed didn't really get the same opportunity if facing a poor Nadal even on clay.
Okay but why did Roger have a 5-5 H2H on Hard+Grass till 2009 against Nadal?
Have we got any good looking explanation there mate?
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Oh I am sorry mate.
It was indeed 5-4. 2-1 Fed grass.
3-3 Hard courts.
But why 3 all Hard courts with Fed being at his peak and clearly the greater player at HCs?
He messed up one match which was very winnable: Dubai 2006. In Miami 2004 reports say Fed was ill so I don't know.

They didn't play many more times on HC either, especially on HC favoring Roger, like IW, USO, Cincy and even the AO on Rebound Ace. Miami isn't a place that Roger likes anyway. Just my 2 cents. ;)
 

ak24alive

Legend
Djokovic has a winning H2H because he got to face 2015-2016 Nadal.
Fair point mate.
I left out Noles 7 straight wins against Rafa in 2015-2016. But I also left out Rafas 2 clay wins over Nole in 2017-18. I think you follow the reasoning there.
Now the H2H stands 23-20 in favour of Rafa.
Also I considered that they are the same age. And since we as a community here are very high on the age thing I took only Feds prime part of the Fedal rivalry. And by the end of 2009 Fedal stood at 13-7 Nadal.
Now you tell me mate what's better 23-20 Nadal or 13-7 Nadal? Age adjusted and more so in the favour of Fed as only his absolute prime is considered.
Or better yet answer this question (as we are comparing Federer and Novak indirectly): what's worse 7-13 or 20-23??
 

ak24alive

Legend
He messed up one match which was very winnable: Dubai 2006. In Miami 2004 reports say Fed was ill so I don't know.

They didn't play many more times on HC either, especially on HC favoring Roger, like IW, USO, Cincy and even the AO on Rebound Ace. Miami isn't a place that Roger likes anyway. Just my 2 cents. ;)
I like to think that mono messed up Roger's 2008 hence the Wimbledon 08 loss. Now this loss messed up Roger's confidence hence the 2009 AO loss.
Miami 2004 he was sick. Dubai he could have won as well. So basically it's 9-0 Federer by the end of 2009 off clay. Then Roger got really old and the rest of the matches don't matter because of that.
By the time Roger was still young(2009) the clay H2H was 9-2 Nadal. Now combining the 9-2 with 0-9 real Hard+Grass H2H we get 11-9 Federer by 2009 and that is all that matters.
Vamos Chum Jetze.
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
I like to think that mono messed up Roger's 2008 hence the Wimbledon 08 loss. Now this loss messed up Roger's confidence hence the 2009 AO loss.
Miami 2004 he was sick. Dubai he could have won as well. So basically it's 9-0 Federer by the end of 2009 off clay. Then Roger got really old and the rest of the matches don't matter because of that.
By the time Roger was still young(2009) the clay H2H was 9-2 Nadal. Now combining the 9-2 with 0-9 real Hard+Grass H2H we get 11-9 Federer by 2009 and that is all that matters.
Vamos Chum Jetze.

c4e55a53-d17d-4397-a60b-2df49f871db7.png
 
D

Deleted member 742196

Guest
Ever fiddled around with those kid’s magic sets back in the day? And someone needed to rescue you from the plastic handcuffs you put on yourself?

That’s what it momentarily felt like, now I have to respond to something before it’s written.


c4e55a53-d17d-4397-a60b-2df49f871db7.png
 
Top