How far will Jannik Sinner hard court set streak go?

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
Jannik Sinner begins his campaign for Australian Open defense vs Jarry. Very tough player for R1. But Sinner is heavy favorite to win vs him.

There is another streak ongoing for Sinner during end of his great last season. Unbeaten set streak. Sinner went undefeated even vs best players at ATP finals.

Sinner streak currently stands at 26. The all time record is Federer at 31 straight sets won followed by Djokovic at 30.

Will Sinner beat the record or fall short?
 

JMR

Hall of Fame
Hard to say -- generally, it's no big deal for the no. 1 seed to win his first couple of matches in straight sets. However, Sinner lost a set in his first match in each of his last two slams, so he's not always a fast starter.
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
Hard to say -- generally, it's no big deal for the no. 1 seed to win his first couple of matches in straight sets. However, Sinner lost a set in his first match in each of his last two slams, so he's not always a fast starter.
Yes. It's actually awesome to see a non age related record set in this day. Not mcenore or Lendl or Fed or Djokovic have 32.

This outright record if happens would be awesome.
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
Jannik Sinner begins his campaign for Australian Open defense vs Jarry. Very tough player for R1. But Sinner is heavy favorite to win vs him.

There is another streak ongoing for Sinner during end of his great last season. Unbeaten set streak. Sinner went undefeated even vs best players at ATP finals.

Sinner streak currently stands at 26. The all time record is Federer at 31 straight sets won followed by Djokovic at 30.

Will Sinner beat the record or fall short?

Great question.

I think Jarry has the chance to nab a set. If he doesn't, Sinner will likely roll past both Federer and Djokovic.
 

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
Out of curiosity, what is the all-time record for consecutive sets won regardless of surface?

Others have already answered the question in the thread.
Jarry could steal a set from him by taking advantage of the fact that, as is tradition, Sinner takes a while to get going at the start of the tournament.
In Beijing, I remember that he played a hyper-aggressive match, trying to close the point at the first opportunity, and in the first set that kamikaze tactic was rewarded.
If Jarry were to fail, honestly, until the possible semifinal, perhaps only Hurkacz could steal a set from him.
Daniel in the 2022 edition of the AO was the only one to steal a set from him before Sinner gave in against Tsitsipas (in my opinion, Sinner's most crushing defeat in a major), but he was a different Sinner.
In the last Shanghai, the Italian ridiculed the Japanese more than the score already says (6-1 6-4).
Etcheverry who was in fact the last player to take a set from him I doubt he can do it again.
For Cobolli his compatriot is the worst possible matchup.
I always see Rune as having regressed, ditto Tsitsipas, De Minaur hasn't taken a set from Sinner in ages, in fact, in 9 matches played not only has he always lost, but only once has he taken a set from him (Sofia 2020).
 

roysid

Legend
Top players dont give their best in the early rounds of a slam and lose sets there. For eg. Djoker in 2019 AO was close to unbeatable but he lost a set in 2nd round or so

So sinner is likely to lose a set in the first two rounds. But if he finds his groove, he easily wins in straights and break that record.
 

JMR

Hall of Fame
Out of curiosity, what is the all-time record for consecutive sets won regardless of surface?
According to Wiki, it's 44, set by Connors in 1974. This is across all tournaments, but Open Era only.

Most of the top numbers are from the 1970s-80s (usual suspects: Jimbo, Borg, Lendl, Mac). The highest total in this century is 32, a tie between Coria and Federer.

The most consecutives sets won in slams is 36 by Federer.
 

Winner Sinner

Hall of Fame
According to Wiki, it's 44, set by Connors in 1974. This is across all tournaments, but Open Era only.

Most of the top numbers are from the 1970s-80s (usual suspects: Jimbo, Borg, Lendl, Mac). The highest total in this century is 32, a tie between Coria and Federer.

The most consecutives sets won in slams is 36 by Federer.
So if she were to reach the final of this Australian Open without losing a set, she would set the all-time record for consecutive sets won across all surfaces in the Open era.
 
It’s is just very, very difficult to win multiple straight sets matches in a row like this which speaks to the absurdly high floor level Sinner possesses.

It’s also just very difficult for anyone no matter how good to win multiple slam matches in a row in straight sets no matter how ostensibly easy the competiton. Go back to all the slam draws the past 35-40 years and see how many players won their first three matches in straight sets, even after the seeding changes that gave top players easier matches in the early rounds.

For example, Sinner is a -5000 favorite over Jarry, but he’s -250 to win in straight sets.

Djokovic has dropped from a -5000 favorite to a -2000 favorite over Basavareddy. He’s -185 to win in straight sets.

Medvedev is a -10,000 favorite over Samrej but a -380 to win in straights .

If Daniel is Sinner’s second round opponent (might be Schoolkate as that’s a 50-50 type match) and Daniel is the absolute perfect player for Sinner to beat up, the odds for him to win in straights would probably be like -285 or something as the books think Jarry can at least hold serve and maybe luck out a tiebreaker.

Even though it looks straightforward that he gets to 32 and behind, the books would would have the odds at near even money, i.e., -110 to -120 for him to win six consecutive sets.
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
It’s is just very, very difficult to win multiple straight sets matches in a row like this which speaks to the absurdly high floor level Sinner possesses.

It’s also just very difficult for anyone no matter how good to win multiple slam matches in a row in straight sets no matter how ostensibly easy the competiton. Go back to all the slam draws the past 35-40 years and see how many players won their first three matches in straight sets, even after the seeding changes that gave top players easier matches in the early rounds.

For example, Sinner is a -5000 favorite over Jarry, but he’s -250 to win in straight sets.

Djokovic has dropped from a -5000 favorite to a -2000 favorite over Basavareddy. He’s -185 to win in straight sets.

Medvedev is a -10,000 favorite over Samrej but a -380 to win in straights .

If Daniel is Sinner’s second round opponent (might be Schoolkate as that’s a 50-50 type match) and Daniel is the absolute perfect player for Sinner to beat up, the odds for him to win in straights would probably be like -285 or something as the books think Jarry can at least hold serve and maybe luck out a tiebreaker.

Even though it looks straightforward that he gets to 32 and behind, the books would would have the odds at near even money, i.e., -110 to -120 for him to win six consecutive sets.
So it's on. 50/50.
 

ChrisJR3264

Hall of Fame
So the appeal by WADA and suspension in April could be hanging over his head too. Not saying it’s going to cost him an early round defeat but Jarry seems like an opponent you’d have to take on in round 3/4 not 1.

I don’t think Iga has entirely been embraced by all in the locker room for her positive doping test.
I’m sure there’s plenty in the locker room that aren’t embracing sinner
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
So the appeal by WADA and suspension in April could be hanging over his head too. Not saying it’s going to cost him an early round defeat but Jarry seems like an opponent you’d have to take on in round 3/4 not 1.

I don’t think Iga has entirely been embraced by all in the locker room for her positive doping test.
I’m sure there’s plenty in the locker room that aren’t embracing sinner
He won 26 sets knowing the suspension was hanging on his head. Why would now be a problem with it ?
 

ChrisJR3264

Hall of Fame
He won 26 sets knowing the suspension was hanging on his head. Why would now be a problem with it ?
Thought the WADA appeal came after and knowing the hearing wouldn’t be until after Australia.

Maybe it doesn’t do anything to bother him in AO. But the hearing can determine either a short term or long suspension. Has to bother anyone.
 
He's a Federer fan....

I don't see a thread on this, so thought I'd ask here: does Monfils winning the title in Auckland and thus becoming the oldest man since 1977 to win a tour title make you rethink whether it was worthwhile for him to keep playing or not? (I'm thinking back to our discussion of all the older players who would/should retire, where I think Monfils was the only one on whom we disagreed). To my mind, for a player of his caliber to set a record of any sort is a worthwhile achievement. But I can imagine you might say it was only a 250 and that for someone who's been in slam semis and MS finals winning a 250 is no biggie. So, I guess it can be seen either way.

N.B. Rosewall won his last title in 1977, and I was born in 1978, so Monfils is the oldest man in my lifetime to win a tour title! Two months older than Feddy was when he last one.

N.N.B. Of course, there's a decent chance this will be a short-term record, as if Djokovic wins a title in October 2025 or later, he'll be older than Monfils is now. But even if that happens, to my mind Monfils winning a title is rare enough to make this a significant feat for him at 38.
 

Rovesciarete

Hall of Fame
Imagine how it could have looked without that, even small, psychological handicap. IMHO if he's cleared at the end of April he can take the other surfaces by storm.

Indeed. Lots of stupid speculation into the other direction. Could have been one of the greatest seasons of the last decades without that contamination. Of course we will never know, but it is fair to point also that possibility out.
 

Fedforever

Hall of Fame
I don't see a thread on this, so thought I'd ask here: does Monfils winning the title in Auckland and thus becoming the oldest man since 1977 to win a tour title make you rethink whether it was worthwhile for him to keep playing or not? (I'm thinking back to our discussion of all the older players who would/should retire, where I think Monfils was the only one on whom we disagreed). To my mind, for a player of his caliber to set a record of any sort is a worthwhile achievement. But I can imagine you might say it was only a 250 and that for someone who's been in slam semis and MS finals winning a 250 is no biggie. So, I guess it can be seen either way.

N.B. Rosewall won his last title in 1977, and I was born in 1978, so Monfils is the oldest man in my lifetime to win a tour title! Two months older than Feddy was when he last one.

N.N.B. Of course, there's a decent chance this will be a short-term record, as if Djokovic wins a title in October 2025 or later, he'll be older than Monfils is now. But even if that happens, to my mind Monfils winning a title is rare enough to make this a significant feat for him at 38.
I guess the question is - is he still enjoying it?

He's presumably been successful enough in his career to not need to be playing for the money so we can assume the answer is "yes".

In which case the title and record is a lovely bonus.

I remember one old guy in English football (who'd done every job connected with football that exists) being asked what the best one was. And his reply was "nothing you do in football is ever as good as just playing it". Perhaps it's the same in tennis
 
I guess the question is - is he still enjoying it?

He's presumably been successful enough in his career to not need to be playing for the money so we can assume the answer is "yes".

In which case the title and record is a lovely bonus.

I remember one old guy in English football (who'd done every job connected with football that exists) being asked what the best one was. And his reply was "nothing you do in football is ever as good as just playing it". Perhaps it's the same in tennis

I'm completely in favor of players keeping going as long as they want. Wawrinka is now much further from his best than Monfils is from his - #156 versus #41; lost in R1 of the AO against unseeded Sonego versus beat Mpetshi Perricard (the #30 seed) - and is almost 18 months older. But fair play to Stan for carrying on if he enjoys it still. I assume he plans to play RG so as to play a slam in his 40s. Whether he goes on much longer than that is an open question.
 
I counted for Federer and he only has 29 straight sets won between 2006/07 on hc.
Tennis Abstract has it out of order because he played vs. Nalbandian before he played vs Roddick.

Last two sets vs. Roddick at TMC
2 vs. Ljubicic, 2 vs. Nadal, 3 vs. Blake at TMC
21 sets at AO
First set vs. Pless in Dubai

2+2+2+3 at TMC
21 at AO
1 in Dubai

31
 

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
Sinner R2 vs WC Schoolkate ranked 173.
He will not even break a sweat and if opponent plays full 3, then Sinner is equaling this record of Federer today.
 

roysid

Legend
According to Wiki, it's 44, set by Connors in 1974. This is across all tournaments, but Open Era only.

Most of the top numbers are from the 1970s-80s (usual suspects: Jimbo, Borg, Lendl, Mac). The highest total in this century is 32, a tie between Coria and Federer.

The most consecutives sets won in slams is 36 by Federer.
Regarding fed record was it in 2007.
First 21 sets in AO and then another 15 sets in FO?
 

roysid

Legend
Top players dont give their best in the early rounds of a slam and lose sets there. For eg. Djoker in 2019 AO was close to unbeatable but he lost a set in 2nd round or so

So sinner is likely to lose a set in the first two rounds. But if he finds his groove, he easily wins in straights and break that record.
Well it happened. This useless streak ended
 

roysid

Legend
Thats right. The streak starts from
Last 2 sets in USO 06 final.
21 sets at AO 07
13 sets in FO 07. He lost the second set in FO 07 QF to Robredo.

So total 35 consecutive sets
 
So it's on. 50/50.
It’s is just very, very difficult to win multiple straight sets matches in a row like this which speaks to the absurdly high floor level Sinner possesses.

It’s also just very difficult for anyone no matter how good to win multiple slam matches in a row in straight sets no matter how ostensibly easy the competiton. Go back to all the slam draws the past 35-40 years and see how many players won their first three matches in straight sets, even after the seeding changes that gave top players easier matches in the early rounds.

For example, Sinner is a -5000 favorite over Jarry, but he’s -250 to win in straight sets.

Djokovic has dropped from a -5000 favorite to a -2000 favorite over Basavareddy. He’s -185 to win in straight sets.

Medvedev is a -10,000 favorite over Samrej but a -380 to win in straights .

If Daniel is Sinner’s second round opponent (might be Schoolkate as that’s a 50-50 type match) and Daniel is the absolute perfect player for Sinner to beat up, the odds for him to win in straights would probably be like -285 or something as the books think Jarry can at least hold serve and maybe luck out a tiebreaker.

Even though it looks straightforward that he gets to 32 and behind, the books would have the odds at near even money, i.e., -110 to -120 for him to win six consecutive sets.
Vegas knows what it’s doing.
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
Still, the fact that he was on it says something interesting about Sinner. He was a slow starter, losing a lot of first sets, then became a guy who was focused from the beginning.

The mentality is perhaps the best improvement I've seen from him since Cahill joined the team. That wasn't even a huge problem for him before, but he is 100% focused now.
 
Top