If Federer wins Brisbane Title

M

McEnroeisanartist

Hall of Fame
If Federer wins Brisbane title, he ties the record for most consecutive years of winning at least one title. He moves into third place for most career titles. He further extends his record of most hard court titles.
 
I wonder why Federer only won slams for 8 years in a row. Nadal broke the record with 9.

Nadal is now going for 10 years in a row of slams. That's the hardest thing to do.
 
Start the year off with some wins. Better not to face Rafa right away. More time with the new racquet and possibly with Edberg, it's all good.

If he wins Brisbane he is the GOAT.
 
Especially if Federer beats Hewitt in the final. I mean, who is better than Hewitt? Toughest opponent in all of Australia :o
 
Povl Carstensen said:
I think it is more about record for most consecutive years of winning at least one title, third place for most career titles and record of most hard court titles.
Click to expand...

That is quite something, remarkable consistency.

How many different hard court titles has he won?

He's never won Brisbane, so if he wins it, that's another feather in the cap.
 
I think he has won Sydney. Can someone confirm this? (By someone, I mean you, Mustard :) )

So, Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane for the complete Australian set perhaps?
 
I find it amazing that even in the tail end of his career, where he's no longer a threat to Rafa or the rest at the very top, Rafanatics still can't help but denigrate him at every possible chance. Even when there's nothing to denigrate.
It's sad.
 
NADALRECORD said:
I wonder why Federer only won slams for 8 years in a row. Nadal broke the record with 9.

Nadal is now going for 10 years in a row of slams. That's the hardest thing to do.
Click to expand...

Because Fed had superior competition in his days and plus the field are more adept on hard court than on clay. And since Nadal rely on clay to keep up the winning streak, it's easier for him since clay is his best surface.
 
TMF said:
Because Fed had superior competition in his days and plus the field are more adept on hard court than on clay. And since Nadal rely on clay to keep up the winning streak, it's easier for him since clay is his best surface.
Click to expand...

TMF - Would you say that Nadal had no genuine clay courters to battle during his reign? If yes, who would you put on that list?
 
Hitman said:
TMF - Would you say that Nadal had no genuine clay courters to battle during his reign? If yes, who would you put on that list?
Click to expand...

It's hard to say which player are genuine cc today since there isn't any specialist surface player like in the 90s and before. Federer/Nole are a hell of a clay court players but are they clay specialist? I don't think so. However they aren't any worse than Bruguera or Muster but these guys are cc specialist. I say Coria or Ferrero are cc specialist but they were long gone before Nadal dominate the clay season.
 
Mustard said:
He hasn't won Auckland, no. Ferrer has dominated that event in recent years.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware of Ferrer's success there. Didn't know if Federer ever went across to play there.

TMF said:
It's hard to say which player are genuine cc today since there isn't any specialist surface player like in the 90s and before. Federer/Nole are a hell of a clay court players but are they clay specialist? I don't think so. However they aren't any worse than Bruguera or Muster but these guys are cc specialist. I say Coria or Ferrero are cc specialist but they were long gone before Nadal dominate the clay season.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying. Can I ask you what would being CC specialists bring to the table against Nadal? I agree that Federer and Djokovic certainly wouldn't be penciled in as CC specialists, yet as you state, they seem like equals to Bruguera and Muster. I would say that Muster, Bruguera can grind better...what do you think?
 
TMF said:
It's hard to say which player are genuine cc today since there isn't any specialist surface player like in the 90s and before. Federer/Nole are a hell of a clay court players but are they clay specialist? I don't think so. However they aren't any worse than Bruguera or Muster but these guys are cc specialist. I say Coria or Ferrero are cc specialist but they were long gone before Nadal dominate the clay season.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I see it as well. Of course it's not Nadal's fault that this was the case for so many years but the fact is that the competition on clay has been abysmal for the best part of a decade now, so much so that it's almost cringeworthy. You'd bet your house on Nadal reaching at least the final of every clay tournament year in year out.
 
Hitman said:
Yes, I am aware of Ferrer's success there. Didn't know if Federer ever went across to play there.
Click to expand...
He lost in the first round to Juan Carlos Ferrero in 2000.

I don't know how Auckland came to be in a discussion about Federer winning in Australia... No wait, I do. You're not 'Merican are you? :lol:
 
Hitman said:
I understand what you are saying. Can I ask you what would being CC specialists bring to the table against Nadal? I agree that Federer and Djokovic certainly wouldn't be penciled in as CC specialists, yet as you state, they seem like equals to Bruguera and Muster. I would say that Muster, Bruguera can grind better...what do you think?
Click to expand...

CC must be fit, incredible endurance, patience and strong will power if he's going to have any chance against Nadal. And that is not enough since Nadal is a great mover, rare mental lapses, and great at crucial point. I don't think any cc specialists except Borg would have challenge Nadal. Both players are the toughest to beat from the baseline. They are extremely fit and mentally tough, their records speaks volume. Yes, I've heard people say Guga would have good chance against Nadal, but I think Nadal consistent and stamina would be too much for him.

Prime Fed and now Nole are excellent defender, and don't see them fall short in a grinding fest against Bruguera/Muster.
 
Djokovic2011 said:
This is exactly how I see it as well. Of course it's not Nadal's fault that this was the case for so many years but the fact is that the competition on clay has been abysmal for the best part of a decade now, so much so that it's almost cringeworthy. You'd bet your house on Nadal reaching at least the final of every clay tournament year in year out.
Click to expand...

Ferrer is pretty good on both clay and hard court. Yet, he has better results on clay and even made the FO final.

I agree it's not Nadal's fault.
 
Gustavo Kuerten blew hot and cold. 2001 was his most consistent clay-court form, but even then, he could lose to Max Mirnyi in Hamburg without even getting his game going, and came within 1 point of losing to Michael Russell in straight sets in the R16 of the French Open. He also got beaten in 3 straight sets on clay, in a very high quality Davis Cup match, in his hometown of Florianopolis, by Lleyton Hewitt. That match is a candidate for Hewitt's best match ever.
 
Bobby Jr said:
He lost in the first round to Juan Carlos Ferrero in 2000.

I don't know how Auckland came to be in a discussion about Federer winning in Australia... No wait, I do. You're not 'Merican are you? :lol:
Click to expand...

Thanks.

'Merican? (I know why you said that! LOL)

TMF said:
CC must be fit, incredible endurance, patience and strong will power if he's going to have any chance against Nadal. And that is not enough since Nadal is a great mover, rare mental lapses, and great at crucial point. I don't think any cc specialists except Borg would have challenge Nadal. Both players are the toughest to beat from the baseline. They are extremely fit and mentally tough, their records speaks volume. Yes, I've heard people say Guga would have good chance against Nadal, but I think Nadal consistent and stamina would be too much for him.

Prime Fed and now Nole are excellent defender, and don't see them fall short in a grinding fest against Bruguera/Muster.
Click to expand...

That seems like a fair and reasonable assessment. Just to add to your statement about Nadal and Borg, I think they are both genetic freaks that probably could have excelled in a variety of sport disciplines that require raw athletic talent.
 
Well Federer has been bad lately at even winning the small events like hamburg an gstaad. Winning this title might rejuvenate him.

I think it all began last year when he neat Delpo in 2 cons matches
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Congrats to Federer - 16 consecutive years winning at least one title
Replies
27
Views
3K
pc1
pc1
M
If Roddick, Murray, and Federer win one more singles title....
Replies
9
Views
1K
jaggy
jaggy
M
What did Federer Achieve in 2013
Replies
42
Views
5K
dr325i
dr325i
The_Order
So what does Nadal have over Djokovic
2 3 4
Replies
156
Views
10K
Phoenix*
Phoenix*
Mike Sams
If Nadal wins a Slam this year, he surpasses Federer!
Replies
13
Views
2K
Warmaster
Warmaster
Back
Top