How many Wimbledon titles would Federer have won on fast grass?

Federer fast grass Wimbledons

  • 10

    Votes: 17 24.6%
  • 11

    Votes: 6 8.7%
  • 12

    Votes: 16 23.2%
  • 13

    Votes: 2 2.9%
  • 14

    Votes: 28 40.6%

  • Total voters
    69

MeatTornado

G.O.A.T.
Assuming the competition remains the same and all the other courts on tour stays the same, meaning that no one starts tailoring their games for fast courts. I'd assume more than the 8 he currently has, but not much more. Maybe in that 10-11 range.

I wouldn't say his game was "perfectly" suited to fast grass. His top tier ground game would be neutralized on true fast grass. As good as his serves, volleys and slices are, his GOAT caliber forehand wouldn't be as effective.
 

PilotPete

Hall of Fame
Well with fast grass, Roddick may have taken a few of Fed's Wimby's but Fed would have gained them from Djokodal. So in the end it may well even out. The only thing that would change is LewII's favourite player ;)
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Assuming the competition remains the same and all the other courts on tour stays the same, meaning that no one starts tailoring their games for fast courts. I'd assume more than the 8 he currently has, but not much more. Maybe in that 10-11 range.

I wouldn't say his game was "perfectly" suited to fast grass. His top tier ground game would be neutralized on true fast grass. As good as his serves, volleys and slices are, his GOAT caliber forehand wouldn't be as effective.
He'd lose to frigging Tim Henman until like 2007
 

tonylg

Legend
His top tier ground game would be neutralized on true fast grass. As good as his serves, volleys and slices are, his GOAT caliber forehand wouldn't be as effective.
The effect on his ground game is the same as all the other baseline bots, but what he'd pick up in ability to attack and approach the net, few of his post 2010 rivals have. What we don't know is much this would have also benefited players like Henman, Srichaphan, Stepanek, Ljubicic, Lopez, Philippoussis, Tsonga, Llodra, Mahut, etc.
 

Pheasant

Hall of Fame
We have to be honest with ourselves. Many have said that the slower and more homogenized have inflated the slam count. I also believe this to be true. I think that the Big 3's slam count would plummet under the 1990s conditions. I think that Fed bags 3-4 Wimbledons in the 2000s and 2-3 during the 2010s. I'd say that he'd end up with 5-7 Wimbledon titles on the fast grass. We'd see some new names in there as well with Roddick grabbing a 1-2 titles, Philippousis maybe snagging a title with his 145 mph bomb serves, etc.

I'd say 5-7.
 

Bamoos

Semi-Pro
He'd lose to frigging Tim Henman until like 2007
El Maestro played twice on fast grass and got creamed in the first round both times but he is winning 10 times??? Jaja.
Yeah pre prime Fed who lost everywhere lmao.

prime and old Fed is more suited to fast grass than anyone on the tour from like 2003-2019.

10 Halle titles which is played on fast grass.
 

tonylg

Legend
We have to be honest with ourselves. Many have said that the slower and more homogenized have inflated the slam count. I also believe this to be true. I think that the Big 3's slam count would plummet under the 1990s conditions. I think that Fed bags 3-4 Wimbledons in the 2000s and 2-3 during the 2010s. I'd say that he'd end up with 5-7 Wimbledon titles on the fast grass. We'd see some new names in there as well with Roddick grabbing a 1-2 titles, Philippousis maybe snagging a title with his 145 mph bomb serves, etc.

I'd say 5-7.
One thing is for sure, the latter rounds wouldn't be full of the likes of Goffin, Agut, Pella and Nishikori.
 

Bamoos

Semi-Pro
We have to be honest with ourselves. Many have said that the slower and more homogenized have inflated the slam count. I also believe this to be true. I think that the Big 3's slam count would plummet under the 1990s conditions. I think that Fed bags 3-4 Wimbledons in the 2000s and 2-3 during the 2010s. I'd say that he'd end up with 5-7 Wimbledon titles on the fast grass. We'd see some new names in there as well with Roddick grabbing a 1-2 titles, Philippousis maybe snagging a title with his 145 mph bomb serves, etc.

I'd say 5-7.
If there were that many fast court threats, they would beat him more at Halle which is played on fast grass.

Maybe if you put Fed in the 90s, he doesn’t win everything, but from 00-10s era he’s by far the best bet to dominate with hisFH, athleticism, return, serve, volleys, slice, variety etc.
 

Third Serve

G.O.A.T.
If there were that many fast court threats, they would beat him more at Halle which is played on fast grass.

Maybe if you put Fed in the 90s, he doesn’t win everything, but from 00-10s era he’s by far the best bet to dominate with hisFH, athleticism, return, serve, volleys, slice, variety etc.
Halle is hardly comparable to a Grand Slam in Wimbledon.
 

tonylg

Legend
If there were that many fast court threats, they would beat him more at Halle which is played on fast grass.

Maybe if you put Fed in the 90s, he doesn’t win everything, but from 00-10s era he’s by far the best bet to dominate with hisFH, athleticism, return, serve, volleys, slice, variety etc.
This is true, even more so post 2010.
 

Start da Game

Hall of Fame
he won multiple wimbledons because they slowed down grass and eliminated the impact of serve and volleyers........hope this answers your question.........
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
he won multiple wimbledons because they slowed down grass and eliminated the impact of serve and volleyers........hope this answers your question.........
After 2002 Fed was probably the only good serve and volleyer even left on tour (Tiger Tim GOATman not a huge factor at Wimby after 2002, Ancic was the only other good one on grass and he had like 2 good years, Scud was pretty good too in 2003). Beyond that you had what, Karlovic, Mahut, Deliciano who employ a lot of S&V on grass?
 

TMF

Talk Tennis Guru
Fast and low bounce grass is an ideal conditions for his game whereas the slow high bounce take away(or reduce) his strength.

I would say he gets at least 10 and max 12.
 

Rafa4LifeEver

Hall of Fame
Simple question.

I voted 12. His game is absolutely perfect for the surface and I can’t see anyone beating him there, apart from the occasional big server.
He won't lose to rafa or nole for sure, but roddick could very well have snatched the wimby 2009 from him, sir. There are some other close encounters with huge servers which could've gone thr other way as well.
 

6august

Hall of Fame
I've heard countless times that Federer could have been multiple Roland Garros winner in another Era. In reality he lost to Luis Horna and broken-back Kuerten in straights.

So just be happy with what you got. Reality is often disappointing.

If fast grass still exists, Pete could have retired later and grabbed some of Fred's Wimby. We never know.
 
Each of big 3 will have lesser WBs. Each of them.

Federer will probably be relatively better than other big 3 ,as he is better on faster surface but overall he will have lesser, maybe 5-6.

Similar to how Sampras would struggle on the grass of today.

Faster surface will help those with a big serve and game a lot. Federer can say buh bye to WB 2004,2009.
 

tonylg

Legend
I keep hearing this dribble about servebots dominating on fast grass at Wimbledon and it's simply not true. The ONLY big server who didn't have an All Time Great net game to win Wimbledon in the Open Era was Ivanisevic. It took him 14 tries and he still had a better net game than every player who has won it since, bar one.

Sampras had an amazing serve, but he also had an exceptional net game and groundstrokes that are infinitely better than the current Wimbledon champ's net game. Same goes for Krajicek, Stich, Edberg and Becker. Actually, Edberg didn't have a booming serve, but he and Cash had even next level net games, maybe even as good as Medvedev.

What we see now at Wimbledon is one dimensional baseline botting, plus a few pure servebots (Raonic, Berrettini, Opelka, Isner, Querrey), so all that has been gotten rid of is net play. As Federer is almost the only player on tour who still has a full array of skills in that area, he'd clean up on fast grass.
 

Devtennis01

Legend
Not that many as in the poll.
Maybe 7 or 8.
If grass was fast, then younger players would break through early on it. Federer would not be making finals in his mid 30s.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Tough to say. He would do better against Djokodal, but a bit worse against big hitters and big servers. Roddick could very well snatch a Wimb or 2 from Fed just because of that.

He also would have a harder time reaching Wimb finals in his 30's with his decreased reflexes, but he'd definitely win a Wimb title or 2 if he gets to the finals since he'd have an advantage over Djokovic on fast grass.
 

NedStark

Rookie
Each of big 3 will have lesser WBs. Each of them.

Federer will probably be relatively better than other big 3 ,as he is better on faster surface but overall he will have lesser, maybe 5-6.

Similar to how Sampras would struggle on the grass of today.

Faster surface will help those with a big serve and game a lot. Federer can say buh bye to WB 2004,2009.
Fast grass helps serve-and-volleyers. And if you believe that 2004 Roddick would have beaten 2003-style Federer playing serve-and-volley tennis, then you are delusional.
 

NedStark

Rookie
Do some of you guys really believe that ball-bashing baseliners (what you call "big hitters") like say, 2004 Roddick, can beat 2003-style Federer playing serve-and-volley on fast grass? You must be kidding.
 
Fast grass helps serve-and-volleyers. And if you believe that 2004 Roddick would have beaten 2003-style Federer playing serve-and-volley tennis, then you are delusional.
You are delusional if you think Roddick with faster SECOND SERVE than Federer's First serve and regular 90+mph FHs won't be beating Federer on faster grass.
 

Bamoos

Semi-Pro
Each of big 3 will have lesser WBs. Each of them.

Federer will probably be relatively better than other big 3 ,as he is better on faster surface but overall he will have lesser, maybe 5-6.

Similar to how Sampras would struggle on the grass of today.

Faster surface will help those with a big serve and game a lot. Federer can say buh bye to WB 2004,2009.
Federer is still a clearly better player than Roddick. Maybe he loses one of those.

Fed will clean up like Sampras did, then surpass him in his 30s.
 

Bamoos

Semi-Pro
Do some of you guys really believe that ball-bashing baseliners (what you call "big hitters") like say, 2004 Roddick, can beat 2003-style Federer playing serve-and-volley on fast grass? You must be kidding.
Yeah, ridiculous comments. Federer does everything better than Roddick except serve speed. The serve itself, he hit more aces in their 2009 final.

Peak/prime and old Fed would clean up on fast grass as he has the best skills for it.

Nextgen aren’t doing anything on medium high bouncing grass, they certainly won’t trouble Fed on faster grass.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Federer is still a clearly better player than Roddick. Maybe he loses one of those.

Fed will clean up like Sampras did, then surpass him in his 30s.
Pete a clearly better player than Goran too. Still lost to him once and was close to losing to him on other occasions too.
 
Top