How many slams does Federer need to win more than Rafa?

How many slams does Federer need in order to be safe from Rafa?

  • 16

    Votes: 23 28.8%

  • 17

    Votes: 2 2.5%

  • 18

    Votes: 19 23.8%

  • 19

    Votes: 6 7.5%

  • 20+

    Votes: 30 37.5%
  • Total voters
    80
nadal_slam_king

nadal_slam_king

Banned
Federer currently has 16 slams. Rafa has 9. Do you think it's enough to hold off Rafa, or will Federer need to win more to keep the record?

I'm thinking Rafa has a great chance of winning 2011 Roland Garros, 2011 Wimbledon and also a decent chance he will win either the 2011 Australian Open OR the 2011 US Open. So let's say hypothetically that Rafa has 11 or 12 slams by the end of 2011.

How many slams do you think Rafa will win after 2011? And more specifically how many Roland Garros titles will Rafa win, do you think he will stop winning Roland Garros after 2011 or does he have more left? And remember, at the end of 2011 Rafa will be 25-years-old.

I'm thinking if Rafa has 12 slams by the end of 2011, or even if he has 11, he will have a great chance at 16 slams because he is still winning Roland Garros in straight sets, and that indicates he can win more of them. So Roland Garros alone could get Rafa to about 15-16 slams. Factor in the possibility of beating a rather weak Wimbledon field (Murray now has lost 6 straight sets to Rafa at Wimbledon) a couple more times. And you'd be brave to give Rafa no chance of winning more hardcourt slams, since he's now at his peak on hardcourts with the faster serve and flatter forehand.

Anywhere between 15-20 slams is very possible, and that's why I think Federer needs to win more if he has any ambition of staying ahead of Rafa. Plus the fact that Rafa has other records in his sights, like overtaking Sampras record of winning 7 of the same grand slam title. And also the Laver record of 4 straight slams which is a chance at 2011 AO.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
Federer currently has 16 slams. Rafa has 9. Do you think it's enough to hold off Rafa, or will Federer need to win more to keep the record?

I'm thinking Rafa has a great chance of winning 2011 Roland Garros, 2011 Wimbledon and also a decent chance he will win either the 2011 Australian Open OR the 2011 US Open. So let's say hypothetically that Rafa has 11 or 12 slams by the end of 2011.

How many slams do you think Rafa will win after 2011? And more specifically how many Roland Garros titles will Rafa win, do you think he will stop winning Roland Garros after 2011 or does he have more left? And remember, at the end of 2011 Rafa will be 25-years-old.

I'm thinking if Rafa has 12 slams by the end of 2011, or even if he has 11, he will have a great chance at 16 slams because he is still winning Roland Garros in straight sets, and that indicates he can win more of them. So Roland Garros alone could get Rafa to about 15-16 slams. Factor in the possibility of beating a rather weak Wimbledon field (Murray now has lost 6 straight sets to Rafa at Wimbledon) a couple more times. And you'd be brave to give Rafa no chance of winning more hardcourt slams, since he's now at his peak on hardcourts with the faster serve and flatter forehand.

Anywhere between 15-20 slams is very possible, and that's why I think Federer needs to win more if he has any ambition of staying ahead of Rafa. Plus the fact that Rafa has other records in his sights, like overtaking Sampras record of winning 7 of the same grand slam title. And also the Laver record of 4 straight slams which is a chance at 2011 AO.
Click to expand...

Think again.
 
ashitaka2010 said:
Think again.
Click to expand...

Well we can all agree that there is a very good chance of Rafa winning RG 2011. So that would mean 10 slams. And I said 11-12 slams by the end of 2011. So all we are talking about is Rafa winning either the AO 2011, Wim 2011 or US Open 2011. Any of them would mean 11 slams.
 
Speculation about tennis in 2-3 years from now is just totally pointless. Do we really need another one of these threads? I'm sure we all know your opinion on Rafa's future slam count by now :|
 
niff said:
Speculation about tennis in 2-3 years from now is just totally pointless. Do we really need another one of these threads? I'm sure we all know your opinion on Rafa's future slam count by now :|
Click to expand...

I have no definitive speculation/prediction. All I know is the odds are heavily in Rafa's favor of Rafa winning RG 2011 and one of the other slams in 2011. That is all I'm saying. That is a conservative estimation of 2011.
 
niff said:
Speculation about tennis in 2-3 years from now is just totally pointless. Do we really need another one of these threads? I'm sure we all know your opinion on Rafa's future slam count by now :|
Click to expand...

I love these threads:) I think it is close where it stands now. I do see a strong possibility that Nadal could catch Fed.

Niff, where in Scotland? Distant relatives from the Cairngorms region.
 
And I'm asking the question about Federer, because he may decide to retire if he thinks he has enough slams to keep the record. But if someone were to say "You will need ..... slams to stay ahead of Rafa" I think Federer would hang on to his career for several more years even if it means a lot of early exits, just to have a chance at increasing the slam record (like Sampras did).
 
dlk said:
I love these threads:) I think it is close where it stands now. I do see a strong possibility that Nadal could catch Fed.

Niff, where in Scotland? Distant relatives from the Cairngorms region.
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with a bit of fun guessing but I've literally seen these words from n_s_k in 20 threads now, it gets tiring :p

I live in Edinburgh, for Uni. Love the Cairngorms, been up there frequently with our mountaineering club :)
 
niff said:
Nothing wrong with a bit of fun guessing but I've literally seen these words from n_s_k in 20 threads now, it gets tiring :p

I live in Edinburgh, for Uni. Love the Cairngorms, been up there frequently with our mountaineering club :)
Click to expand...

This the first time I've ever made a thread regarding Rafa's grand slam future. And it's just as much about Federer's future. Go and check my profile, it lists every thread I've ever made, all 13 of them and none are related to Rafa's future number of grand slams.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
This the first time I've ever made a thread regarding Rafa's grand slam future. And it's just as much about Federer's future.
Click to expand...
I didn't say they were all your threads. You post your projections about "Nadal surpassing 16 slams"/"ruling Roland Garros forever" in practically any Nadal/Federer thread on here. And on MTF.
 
Cooper_Tecnifibre4 said:
How many more Nad v Fed threads does "nadal-slam-king" need to post before he gets booted of the boards eh?
Click to expand...

I've only ever made THREE threads about "Nad v Fed", and that includes today's thread:

How many slams does Federer need to win more than Rafa?

Which players have been defending champ on 3 surfaces simultaneously?

What does Vera's 6-4 6-3 USO win over Wozniacki tell us?

2 hardcourt slams, each only has 50% credibility, while RG has 100%, Wimbledon 100%

Nadal 468-100, Federer was 194-100

Japan: King of Hardcourt Rafa d Tursunov 6-4 6-1

Nadal vs Djokovic Final OR.....Federer vs Djokovic Semi.....which was higher quality?

Who has won GS titles with the easier SF & F opponents? Federer or Rafa?

Which movie/tv character do pro players remind you of?

Over the past 11 years, 9 times the 2nd semi winner has won US Open

Is Ana Ivanovic the kindest personality you've seen in WTA?

Wimbledon 2010 was just as fast as Wimbledon 2003

Which slam's ballppl perform the best? rank in order, example: wim ao rg uso
 
Well it's a legit question we'll have to face soon as Federer's final events loom. And it will mean a lot to Federer's fans because the number "16" is mentioned a lot on the messageboard.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
I've only ever made THREE threads about "Nad v Fed", and that includes today's thread:

How many slams does Federer need to win more than Rafa?

Which players have been defending champ on 3 surfaces simultaneously?

What does Vera's 6-4 6-3 USO win over Wozniacki tell us?

2 hardcourt slams, each only has 50% credibility, while RG has 100%, Wimbledon 100%

Nadal 468-100, Federer was 194-100

Japan: King of Hardcourt Rafa d Tursunov 6-4 6-1

Nadal vs Djokovic Final OR.....Federer vs Djokovic Semi.....which was higher quality?

Who has won GS titles with the easier SF & F opponents? Federer or Rafa?

Which movie/tv character do pro players remind you of?

Over the past 11 years, 9 times the 2nd semi winner has won US Open

Is Ana Ivanovic the kindest personality you've seen in WTA?

Wimbledon 2010 was just as fast as Wimbledon 2003

Which slam's ballppl perform the best? rank in order, example: wim ao rg uso
Click to expand...

Ok if that's true, My bad. There's just so many usernames with "nadal" in them.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
Well it's a legit question we'll have to face soon as Federer's final events loom. And it will mean a lot to Federer's fans because the number "16" is mentioned a lot on the messageboard.
Click to expand...
By glory hunters. Personally I think that reducing tennis to numbers and hypothetical league tables is inane.
 
Of course ideally he should win another 2-4 to get a safe distance from Nadal, but I don't think he is too concerned about that. There's really nothing one can do if Nadal decides to win everything and break the record. It's destiny in a way, just like it was destiny for Fed to break Pete's record. Federer has already done enough to cement his place in tennis history, he doesn't need to prove himself anymore
 
aphex said:
Muppet, the record is (more) important because it was done in a calendar year.
Click to expand...

The record I'm talking about is FOUR straight slams, because if Rafa wins the 2011 Australian Open he can then go for FIVE straight slams if he wins 2011 Roland Garros. That means he would have won more consecutive slams than any player in the Open Era. That is the only record that matters at this point, because that is a record Rafa can realistically take.

Winning all FOUR in a Calendar year isn't worth talking about until somebody is actually close to doing so, and even if they did it wouldn't be their own record it'd be equaling Rod Laver's record.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
The record I'm talking about is FOUR straight slams, because if Rafa wins the 2011 Australian Open he can then go for FIVE straight slams if he wins 2011 Roland Garros. That means he would have won more consecutive slams than any player in the Open Era. That is the only record that matters at this point, because that is a record Rafa can realistically take.

Winning all FOUR in a Calendar year isn't worth talking about until somebody is actually close to doing so, and even if they did it wouldn't be their own record it'd be equaling Rod Laver's record.
Click to expand...

Oh, ok...I thought you were somehow equating 4 in a row with the calendar slam...

Although both are nearly impossible, CYGS is even harder...
 
aphex said:
Oh, ok...I thought you were somehow equating 4 in a row with the calendar slam...

Although both are nearly impossible, CYGS is even harder...
Click to expand...

Winning the AO 2011 is far from impossible. Rafa is actually the favorite to win that. Whereas winning the CYGS is indeed almost impossible. I don't know how you got the impression I was comparing the 2 records. I was only talking about one of the records, the consecutive slams in Open Era record. The records Rafa has a very good shot at are:

- Consecutive Slams in Open Era (Laver won 4 in a row, Rafa if he wins the AO 2011 should win 5 and a good shot at 6 by winning Wimbledon 2011)

- Most slams won of a single title (Sampras has the record with 7 Wimbledons, Rafa can get 3 more Roland Garros Titles to make it 8 and hopefully more)

- Most slams won in a career (Federer has won 16, Rafa should have 11 or 12 by the end of 2011)
 
nadal_slam_king said:
Winning the AO 2011 is far from impossible. Rafa is actually the favorite to win that. Whereas winning the CYGS is indeed almost impossible. I don't know how you got the impression I was comparing the 2 records. I was only talking about one of the records, the consecutive slams in Open Era record. The records Rafa has a very good shot at are:

- Consecutive Slams in Open Era (Laver won 4 in a row, Rafa if he wins the AO 2011 should win 5 and a good shot at 6 by winning Wimbledon 2011)

- Most slams won of a single title (Sampras has the record with 7 Wimbledons, Rafa can get 3 more Roland Garros Titles to make it 8 and hopefully more)

- Most slams won in a career (Federer has won 16, Rafa should have 11 or 12 by the end of 2011)
Click to expand...

that pretty sucks though. rafa plays best when everyone think he has no chance.
 
Messarger said:
that pretty sucks though. rafa plays best when everyone think he has no chance.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but he's rarely got the chance to be favorite over the years except for Roland Garros. Can't remember who was the favorite for 2009 Australian Open (probably Federer, even though Rafa was the Number One seed).
 
I have nadal as the favorite at AO 2011 too! This could be the 1st hardcourt slam where he is the clear numero uno favorite. Vamos. :)
 
aphex said:
Yeah, totally unjustified...he's a completely fair and objective poster

"nadal" in his screen name only reinforces his objectivity
Click to expand...

hes not that bad. there's another user with nadal's first name in his username which is a down right knob . you know you have failed as a troll when the federer fans dont even care to respond to such a ridiculous claim.
 
Nadal can win all the slams from now until the end of 2011, or he can win nothing. We can't know. Who would have thought Fed would lose his domination in 2008? Who would have thought Nadal would lose the #1 ranking in 2009? We never know, and anything can happen. With the current field, its safe to assume Nadal will win 2-4 slams next year, with 3 being the most likely number. However, if Federer takes it seriously again and if Murray and Djokovic decide they mean business again in slams, Nadal will have a tough time. I wonder what will happen if both Fed and Nadal go slamless in 2011. That would be pretty funny.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
Winning the AO 2011 is far from impossible. Rafa is actually the favorite to win that. Whereas winning the CYGS is indeed almost impossible. I don't know how you got the impression I was comparing the 2 records. I was only talking about one of the records, the consecutive slams in Open Era record. The records Rafa has a very good shot at are:

- Consecutive Slams in Open Era (Laver won 4 in a row, Rafa if he wins the AO 2011 should win 5 and a good shot at 6 by winning Wimbledon 2011)

- Most slams won of a single title (Sampras has the record with 7 Wimbledons, Rafa can get 3 more Roland Garros Titles to make it 8 and hopefully more)

- Most slams won in a career (Federer has won 16, Rafa should have 11 or 12 by the end of 2011)
Click to expand...

Rafa is the favorite because he's ranked #1, not because he is the best HC player out there. On a good day, Murray, Djoko, Fed, Davy, Delpo, Roddick can all beat Nadal on hard courts. If Nadal meets Murray again in AO I think he will suffer the same fate as in 2010 (only then he would have to invent some other injury excuse).
 
P_Agony said:
Nadal can win all the slams from now until the end of 2011, or he can win nothing. We can't know. Who would have thought Fed would lose his domination in 2008? Who would have thought Nadal would lose the #1 ranking in 2009? We never know, and anything can happen. With the current field, its safe to assume Nadal will win 2-4 slams next year, with 3 being the most likely number. However, if Federer takes it seriously again and if Murray and Djokovic decide they mean business again in slams, Nadal will have a tough time. I wonder what will happen if both Fed and Nadal go slamless in 2011. That would be pretty funny.
Click to expand...

Why not? From 2007 after the Australian Open his level of play decreased significantly, even though he still won 3 majors. Prime Federer would never lose to Canas, Montanes. I personally didnt really know what to expect from Federer in 2008, but i wasnt all O.o o.O O.o when Nadal won Wimbledon.
 
Messarger said:
Why not? From 2007 after the Australian Open his level of play decreased significantly, even though he still won 3 majors. Prime Federer would never lose to Canas, Montanes. I personally didnt really know what to expect from Federer in 2008, but i wasnt all O.o o.O O.o when Nadal won Wimbledon.
Click to expand...

It was the first and only year he beat Rafa on all 3 surfaces. Fed was very solid in 2007, minus a few blips.
 
P_Agony said:
It was the first and only year he beat Rafa on all 3 surfaces. Fed was very solid in 2007, minus a few blips.
Click to expand...

Yeah you said it, a few blips. Prime Fed would neve had those blips, which was what made his 2008 season not so surprising. I mean, if he suddenly went from his '06 level of play to '08 level of play, then it would come as a shock to me.
 
Messarger said:
Yeah you said it, a few blips. Prime Fed would neve had those blips, which was what made his 2008 season not so surprising. I mean, if he suddenly went from his '06 level of play to '08 level of play, then it would come as a shock to me.
Click to expand...

2008 WAS surprising to me, because even though Fed had a few blips in 2007, he still reached all 4 slam finals, won 3, won 2 MS titles, and won the YEC. In 2008 he didn't even come close to that level. It was not a 'slight' decline, it was a huge one.
 
P_Agony said:
2008 WAS surprising to me, because even though Fed had a few blips in 2007, he still reached all 4 slam finals, won 3, won 2 MS titles, and won the YEC. In 2008 he didn't even come close to that level. It was not a 'slight' decline, it was a huge one.
Click to expand...

Well, that's if you're going by results alone. If you look at 2007, his forehand was making more unforced errors, abeit not in the slams, but his wasnt able to perform at his absolute peak level in every match he played. In 2008, this became more serious and hence his 2008 results.
 
Messarger said:
Well, that's if you're going by results alone. If you look at 2007, his forehand was making more unforced errors, abeit not in the slams, but his wasnt able to perform at his absolute peak level in every match he played. In 2008, this became more serious and hence his 2008 results.
Click to expand...

2007 Aussie was pure dominace considering he beat Roddick squarely and on fire Gonzalez.

Indian Wells and Miami were bad loses but Canas reached the Miami final so we can say Canas at least had one good win!

Monte Carlo and Rome....Bad Tatics.

Hamburg was pure dominance and beating Rafa legitmatelly. FO was his best perfomance on clay even though he won in 2009. That year he should have beaten Rafa easily in 3. Federer had the vibe of a true clay courter in the semi and final and it was showing agianst Rafa.

Wimbledon was normal as usual except for that 4th set mental slump agianst Rafa.

Toronto he just got outclassed by Djokovic and Concinatti he won like he should. US open he won with some struggle but still like Federer.

Paris and Madrid....he was outclassed by Nalbandian best tennis performances.

WTF...He won convincingly. There was only minot slumps in 2007 agianst Canas and in MC and Rome. TO be honest...2008 was the most suprising year...where everyone believed Federer would dominate and we saw Nadal taking the mantle.

2004-07 was Federer prime years. 2003 latter was too short to add. 2008 till now he isn't what he used to be!
 
kishnabe said:
2007 Aussie was pure dominace considering he beat Roddick squarely and on fire Gonzalez.

Indian Wells and Miami were bad loses but Canas reached the Miami final so we can say Canas at least had one good win!

Monte Carlo and Rome....Bad Tatics.

Hamburg was pure dominance and beating Rafa legitmatelly. FO was his best perfomance on clay even though he won in 2009. That year he should have beaten Rafa easily in 3. Federer had the vibe of a true clay courter in the semi and final and it was showing agianst Rafa.

Wimbledon was normal as usual except for that 4th set mental slump agianst Rafa.

Toronto he just got outclassed by Djokovic and Concinatti he won like he should. US open he won with some struggle but still like Federer.

Paris and Madrid....he was outclassed by Nalbandian best tennis performances.

WTF...He won convincingly. There was only minot slumps in 2007 agianst Canas and in MC and Rome. TO be honest...2008 was the most suprising year...where everyone believed Federer would dominate and we saw Nadal taking the mantle.

2004-07 was Federer prime years. 2003 latter was too short to add. 2008 till now he isn't what he used to be!
Click to expand...

Yep. Good post, I fully agree.
 
kishnabe said:
2007 Aussie was pure dominace considering he beat Roddick squarely and on fire Gonzalez.

yeah, i mentioned post AO'07 in an earlier post.

Indian Wells and Miami were bad loses but Canas reached the Miami final so we can say Canas at least had one good win!

Monte Carlo and Rome....Bad Tatics.

Hamburg was pure dominance and beating Rafa legitmatelly. FO was his best perfomance on clay even though he won in 2009. That year he should have beaten Rafa easily in 3. Federer had the vibe of a true clay courter in the semi and final and it was showing agianst Rafa.

Wimbledon was normal as usual except for that 4th set mental slump agianst Rafa.

Toronto he just got outclassed by Djokovic and Concinatti he won like he should. US open he won with some struggle but still like Federer.

Paris and Madrid....he was outclassed by Nalbandian best tennis performances.

WTF...He won convincingly. There was only minot slumps in 2007 agianst Canas and in MC and Rome. TO be honest...2008 was the most suprising year...where everyone believed Federer would dominate and we saw Nadal taking the mantle.

2004-07 was Federer prime years. 2003 latter was too short to add. 2008 till now he isn't what he used to be!
Click to expand...

I agree with you, but i just dont think that a prime Federer would have lost to Montanes, Canas. Prime Federer would never been outclassed by Djokovic, or anyone for that matter. These were what made his "slump" in 2008 not so surprising, at least to me.

edit: also, Nadal was improving loads on grass from 06 to 07. Who would have thought that he would take Federer to 5 in '07? With Nadal improving, and Fed deproving, 2008 didnt seem so surprising after all.
 
kishnabe said:
Hamburg was pure dominance and beating Rafa legitmatelly. FO was his best perfomance on clay even though he won in 2009. That year he should have beaten Rafa easily in 3. Federer had the vibe of a true clay courter in the semi and final and it was showing agianst Rafa.
Click to expand...

4_1_72.gif
 
nadal_slam_king said:
The record I'm talking about is FOUR straight slams, because if Rafa wins the 2011 Australian Open he can then go for FIVE straight slams if he wins 2011 Roland Garros. That means he would have won more consecutive slams than any player in the Open Era. That is the only record that matters at this point, because that is a record Rafa can realistically take.

Winning all FOUR in a Calendar year isn't worth talking about until somebody is actually close to doing so, and even if they did it wouldn't be their own record it'd be equaling Rod Laver's record.
Click to expand...



Would this then be a more impressive record ie 5 consecutive slams, 6 consecutive slams 7 consecutive slams?
 
Rafa has possibly 4 slam winning years left (maybe more?), Fed 1-2?. Rafa is 7 behind Fed. Assuming a rate of 2 a year for Rafa, that's 8, making 17, Fed needs 2 slams then for 18. Basically then, for every 4 slams Rafa gets from now on Fed needs to win 1.
 
Many things can happen but I still think that Rafa has got at least an additional 4 RG's within his reach. Grass is uncertain, he was down two sets to one two times this year. Hardcourt is really wearing on him, even with his newly found serve.

4-5 RG's
1-3 W's
1-3 HC-slams

So counting within these parameters, 4+2+2 and 5+2+2 are the most common, which adds up to 17,5 in total. Hence eighteen slams for Fed. Notice that there's a certain bit of irony to it since you can't really tell sh-t in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Madinolf
Longest win streaks in Grand Slams from Big3
Replies
32
Views
1K
pj80
P
titoelcolombiano
Where will Rafa win title # 90?
Replies
15
Views
783
TheAverageFedererFan
TheAverageFedererFan
Soulie
How many more Slams will Rafa win?
Replies
28
Views
2K
LuckyR
LuckyR
Rafa is the goat
calederslam predictions for Rafa and Roger
Replies
9
Views
744
Manus Domini
M
vanioMan
The most important Slam victory in players' careers
Replies
41
Views
1K
SpinToWin
SpinToWin
Back
Top