In the final analysis, Federer actually came closer to the CYGS (TWICE)

duaneeo

Legend
Who cares who came closer, lol. When it comes to achieving the CYGS, winning only the AO, or AO-RG, or AO-RG-WB all mean one thing: Failure.
 
Even as a huge Federer fan this is a giant over reach. Novak let the moment get to him and had less left in the tank than we all thought, but even two sets down he had better odds of beating Medvedev than Fed ever had of beating Rafa in ‘06 or ‘07 at RG. Heck, give me this version of Novak down 2 sets vs Medvedev over any version of Fed up two sets vs ‘06 or ‘07 Rafa at RG. That’s actually still easy money, you’d have to give Fed 3 or 4 games and a break point in the final set against this year’s Nadal for 50/50 odds.
 

bnjkn

Semi-Pro
06 Federer could never do it because there was Nadal on clay, completely unplayable. He could have done it in 09 because of the Solderling miracle and because he was still close to his peak, but he folded against Nadal at the AO and squandered the Del Potro USO match. Nadal and Del Potro were at an extremely high level, but so was Federer, and he couldn't get it done.
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
You're not allowed to give any praise to Federer on here anymore since all of his accomplishments mean nothing, having to beat the likes of Hewitt and Roddick who are far inferior to Berrettini and Tsitsipas
Or Nadal's for that matter lol. Praise the only one that matters! :D

 

Fedeonic

Hall of Fame
How are you the first person to catch this? I noticed that I messed up after the third reply and decided to let it go and see how long it would take.
Cause I'm still pretty good on maths and I originally thought you were just pushing an agenda, which right now I don't see, considering you're a Nadal fan, I guess.
 

PilotPete

Hall of Fame
Yes Djokovic had the correct order, but the point is he would never even have reached that point had he faced 06 or 07 Nadal at the FO like Federer did. Sorry, not happening.
 

sportsfan1

Hall of Fame
Even as a huge Federer fan this is a giant over reach. Novak let the moment get to him and had less left in the tank than we all thought, but even two sets down he had better odds of beating Medvedev than Fed ever had of beating Rafa in ‘06 or ‘07 at RG. Heck, give me this version of Novak down 2 sets vs Medvedev over any version of Fed up two sets vs ‘06 or ‘07 Rafa at RG. That’s actually still easy money, you’d have to give Fed 3 or 4 games and a break point in the final set against this year’s Nadal for 50/50 odds.
Maybe it wasn't the pressure that got to Djokovic, instead it was a combination of Medvedev outplaying him in long rallies which really frustrated him, some fatigue from the semi final against zverev (although he's done just fine in previous b2b 5 setters), and coming into the uso without any warm up tournaments. A guy who has turned around and won from 0-2 sets and match points down so many times would be more resilient to media and record pressure, just as fedal are. No one so dominant just becomes mentally brittle and physically old overnight, even if the loss makes it look so.
 

WildRevolver

Semi-Pro
Cause I'm still pretty good on maths and I originally thought you were just pushing an agenda, which right now I don't see, considering you're a Nadal fan, I guess.
No, no…I was absolutely pushing an agenda but was posting while on a work call so only half paying attention.
 

zvelf

Hall of Fame
All those saying Fed wasn’t close, I have to laugh. It’s the same in the record books, 3 out of 4 slams with a defeat in the other final. All the hypothetical pressure etc is just that. The achievement is the same.
The achievement of getting close to winning 4 slams in the same year is the same but the achievement of getting close to winning a CYGS was only close for Djokovic and very far for Federer.

GOAT this, GOAT that. It’s not even a thing to me really. Both Federer and Djokovic have excelled with multi slam years. 4 consecutive slams also great achievement but not recognised as the Grand Slam.
Well, you can't have it both ways. Either the order matters or it doesn't. If order doesn't matter, Djokovic achieved the equivalent of a Grand Slam already. If they do matter, then Federer didn't come close to achieving a Grand Slam.
 

Sunny014

Legend
You can't say that, because we've seen now twice in the past 10 years just how the pressure builds as you get closer and closer to the end of that long road. If Federer had won either of those Roland Garros finals you don't know what state he would have been in come New York. The pressure might have broken him too.
As if losing in the final of the Roland Garros helped him in New York in 06 and 07?

Regardless of he winning/losing 06 and 07 FOs he would have roasted Roddick and young Novak in the finals, it was a no brainer, Federer was too strong for his field at his peak, he surged so far ahead out of the blue that even touching him was unthinkable in his peak, only Nadal did it on clay and that was because he himself was a GOAT level guy at the very peak of his powers without any injury or anything to bother him.
 

urban

Legend
Djoker came closest, to the final hurdle, as Crawford, who had a 2-1 lead vs. Perry in 1933, and Hoad, who at least won the first set against Rosewall in 1956. As said, the pressure of the real Grand Slam gets higher, the nearer you comes to the finish line. Its not comparable to all Martina, Serena and Nole Slams, as good as they were. The real Grand Slam is the Mount Everest (or the winter K2) of tennis. Its extremely rare, to get into this position to win the whole jackpot, and its a now or never, do or die situation, and that makes it extremely tough. It was a wonder that Nole got into this position at the ripe age of 34, when he played his best tennis 10 to 5 years before. He did it not on sheer billiance, but on resilience and stamina, outlasting his opponents, who several times played better on the day. But he spent a lot of energy, and the final against a very fine and clever opponent was one bridge too far for him.
The pressure of the Grand Slam got to Hoad, when he saw his image as potential "Grand Slammer" on the front page of Life (the biggest illustrated paper in those days, where normally no tennis player appeared). The pressure got to Serena, when all US papers and tv programs, began to celebrate her beforehand. And the pressure got to Nole. It was for Nole more intrinsic than extrinsic pressure, because the tv and paper stories on him were imo pretty underwhelming until the final. The pressure of taking the jackpot made Serena and Nole cry, which tells a lot. Given this do or die situation, i doubt, that Fed could have handled that. Fed never was the mentally toughest player, and he lost some matches at USO vs. Del Potro or Nole, he should have won. For Nadal, as for Borg it was imo more a physical and mental problem to behold form over a long season, because they often excelled at RG and Wim and had a bit of a letdown in the late slam season.
 
Last edited:

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
As if losing in the final of the Roland Garros helped him in New York in 06 and 07?

Regardless of he winning/losing 06 and 07 FOs he would have roasted Roddick and young Novak in the finals, it was a no brainer, Federer was too strong for his field at his peak, he surged so far ahead out of the blue that even touching him was unthinkable in his peak, only Nadal did it on clay and that was because he himself was a GOAT level guy at the very peak of his powers without any injury or anything to bother him.
In 2006 definitely. He was head and shoulders above the field and not even the pressure would have stopped him. That's why the RG final 2006 (where he had his chances) was the most painful loss of his career, far above the standalone 2011 final. For 2007 I'm not so sure. Federer had to save set points in the first 2 sets, and maybe with the added pressure of the CYGS Djokovic (against whom he lost the last match before that final) could haven taken profit just like Medvedev did yesterday.
 

gadge

Professional
That assessment is underestimating the pressure of CYGS at USO when someone had already won the first 3 slams. I mean in what universe does Serena lose to Vinci at the US open semi finals. Both Serena and Novak who are mentally miles ahead of roger crumbled like a pack of cards at the sight of a CYGS so the linearity is vital.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
I do think 06 Fed was the closest. You can be linear if you want to be unnecessarily anal, but remove GOATdal in his epic kit whom no one was ever gonna beat at the FO, and Fed would have done it. (In 07 too)
In 2007 Fedal were too close in a direct match-up on Wimbledon grass to call CYGS for Fed if he had somehow won FO. In general I feel the field started catching up to Fed in a bit in 2007 compared to previous 3 years.

2006 I agree. Even their FO match was decently close given that Fed won 1st set 6-1 and pushed the 4th set into tiebreak, and there was a big gulf between Fed and the rest of the field on HC/grass. If it was meant to happen, 2006 would have been the year.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Novak came closest logically, no doubt abt it.

But in terms of level had luck favored then Fed (06, 07), Mcenroe 84, Connors 74 were all on the verge of taking CYGS, they were either stopped by bad luck or some formidable GOAT level candidate on that surface which Novak clearly did not have, Novak was in a position to take CYGS in 2011 and 2015 but out of blue Federer produced his genius play there to prevent him and even Stan proved too strong..... So only these 6 years were players close to a level worthy of CYGS since LAVER.

74, 84, 06, 07, 11, 15.


I don't count 2021 because Novak's level throughout the year (except french open) was trash (according to me when I compare the champs from above years)
I dont count 2004 because Fed was trash on clay, one cannot do CYGS by being trash on 1 surface
I dont count 2010 because claydal was injured at the time of AO, one cannot be a contender if injured
 

Sunny014

Legend
In 2006 definitely. He was head and shoulders above the field and not even the pressure would have stopped him. That's why the RG final 2006 (where he had his chances) was the most painful loss of his career, far above the standalone 2011 final. For 2007 I'm not so sure. Federer had to save set points in the first 2 sets, and maybe with the added pressure of the CYGS Djokovic (against whom he lost the last match before that final) could haven taken profit just like Medvedev did yesterday.
Novak had no chance in the 07 final, even if Fed had lost a set out of those, he would have won in 4-5 sets, no chance of losing, Novak was not at that level on HCs to beat Federer even in a close encounter, the shots were just not that good.

Novak became worthy of beating a fit Federer in 2010USO and since then has never seemed weak in any match unless outplayed, but in 2007 he was clearly weak and inferior.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
That assessment is underestimating the pressure of CYGS at USO when someone had already won the first 3 slams. I mean in what universe does Serena lose to Vinci at the US open semi finals. Both Serena and Novak who are mentally miles ahead of roger crumbled like a pack of cards at the sight of a CYGS so the linearity is vital.
Fed was toying with the field in 2006 on HC/grass, I doubt CYGS pressure would have fazed him. In general, Fed's problem was dealing with Djokodal specifically (especially once the age gap started working in their favour) not the big stage pressure per say, he wouldn't have won 20 slams otherwise.

People forget that Fed used to be a tough cookie mentally in his peak years, he had ridiculous amount of confidence.
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
Novak had no chance in the 07 final, even if Fed had lost a set out of those, he would have won in 4-5 sets, no chance of losing, Novak was not at that level on HCs to beat Federer even in a close encounter, the shots were just not that good.
Not in a normal Slam final most likely, but I would say he was already good enough to take advantage of the CYGS pressure as Medvedev did on Sunday. And as I said, Federer had lost the last against Djokovic before, the 2007 Montreal final. For sure that created some doubt, and then add the CYGS situation, and the trouble is there.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
That assessment is underestimating the pressure of CYGS at USO when someone had already won the first 3 slams. I mean in what universe does Serena lose to Vinci at the US open semi finals. Both Serena and Novak who are mentally miles ahead of roger crumbled like a pack of cards at the sight of a CYGS so the linearity is vital.
Its absolutely ridiculously clueless to say Serena/Djokovic are way ahead of fed mentally. They are better, but not by a big gap.
Fed was pretty tough mentally.

Also peak year when dominant (06/07) is not the same as 15 Serena or 21 Djokovic.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Federer's struggles were mostly related to he slowing down at 27-28 as every champ does (Nadal was 27 in 2013, Novak was 28 in 2015, see the physical speed/power oriented decline after that) and the rest of the field getting stronger and grindier

[ Guys born 85 and above were physically stronger than guys born 81 or below, plus better baseliners too due to growing up in the baseliner era, developing better muscle fibers in their body ]

Give Federer a 1987 born scenario, he is a better shotmaker, he will surge ahead of everyone, there won't be anyone stopping him since his footspeed would equal, stamina would be equal, he takes the ball earliest and is the greatest strokemaker in tennis, what can anyone do against this sort of a guy??? Nadal and Novak would be helpless, Nadal can at least target the backhand, Novak would have no cards to play, would lose everywhere outside the Aus Open very badly to Fed everytime.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Djoker came closest, to the final hurdle, as Crawford, who had a 2-1 lead vs. Perry in 1933, and Hoad, who at least won the first set against Rosewall in 1956. As said, the pressure of the real Grand Slam gets higher, the nearer you comes to the finish line. Its not comparable to all Martina, Serena and Nole Slams, as good as they were. The real Grand Slam is the Mount Everest (or the winter K2) of tennis. Its extremely rare, to get into this position to win the whole jackpot, and its a now or never, do or dy situation, and that makes it extremely tough. It was a wonder that Nole got into this position at the ripe age of 34, when he played his best tennis 10 to 5 years before. He did it not on sheer billiance, but on resilience and stamina, outlasting his opponents, who several times played better on the day. But he spent a lot of energy, and the final against a very fine and clever opponent was one bridge too far for him.
The pressure of the Grand Slam got to Hoad, when he saw his image as potential "Grand Slammer" on the front page of Life (the biggest illustrated paper in those days, where normally no tennis player appeared). The pressure got the Serena, when all US papers and tv programs, began to celebrate her beforehand. And the pressure got to Nole. It was for Nole more intrinsic than extrinsic pressure, because the tv and paper stories on him were imo pretty underwhelming until the final. The pressure of taking the jackpot made Serena and Nole cry, which tells a lot. Given this do or dy situation, i doubt, that Fed could have handled that. Fed never was the mentally toughest player, and he lost some matches at USO vs. Del Potro or Nole, he should have won. For Nadal, as for Borg it was imo more a physical and mental problem to behold form over a long season, because they often excelled at RG and Wim and had a bit of a letdown in the late slam season.
Of course you doubt fed, given you are a fed disparager

Peak fed in 06/07 with peak level confidence is nowhere near the same situation as 15 Serena or 21 Djokovic

and @ the bold part, of course no mention of the ****ty competiton that allowed Djokovic to get this far.
 
I know Djokovic's run this year was the most dramatic because he took it down to the very last match out of the 28 grand slam matches needed to achieve the CYGS.
Well if you don't do that, then the CYGS isn't possible. So it's totally illogical to state another player was closer if they didn't do that. If you don't win the first three slams, then you can't win the CYGS, so you're not closer, you're another year away from an attempt at it.
 
Last edited:

abmk

Bionic Poster
In 2007 Fedal were too close in a direct match-up on Wimbledon grass to call CYGS for Fed if he had somehow won FO. In general I feel the field started catching up to Fed in a bit in 2007 compared to previous 3 years.

2006 I agree. Even their FO match was decently close given that Fed won 1st set 6-1 and pushed the 4th set into tiebreak, and there was a big gulf between Fed and the rest of the field on HC/grass. If it was meant to happen, 2006 would have been the year.
But if fed had won against Nadal in RG 07, he'd be clearly more confident and Nadal less at Wimbledon.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Not in a normal Slam final most likely, but I would say he was already good enough to take advantage of the CYGS pressure as Medvedev did on Sunday. And as I said, Federer had lost the last against Djokovic before, the 2007 Montreal final. For sure that created some doubt, and then add the CYGS situation, and the trouble is there.
Wrong .... FALSE !!!



Medvedev did not take advantage of any pressure..... Novak was Old/tired and deflated throughout the year, it only became worse enough to catch up with him at USO

First of all Novak's level at AO was not comparable any peak versions of any champ, he was injured, but he somehow pulled it off since he was fresh so his body managed + muggery from youngsters

At the FO he was tremendous, but he was tired after the semi vs Nadal, Stefanos was a loser (a royal mug) who could not win from a 2 set lead, the guy came back from 2 sets down scenario 1 year back vs Novak at the same FO in the semis and now he throws away a 2 set lead ??? This is choking at its finest, not any exceptional level from Novak

At W again a mug field, when Shapo was hitting his powerful shots Novak would look helpless but he won over the inexperienced guy, berreitini was as useless as ever....

At USO he finally was so tired that he could not do anything, Sascha was not upto the mark in the semis and choked it..... but Medvedev destroyed Novak totally.

So this is a problem with Novak's level throughout the year, not mental strength.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Mental strength is an overrated term.

If you appear for an examination of advanced physics and don't know anything technical then your mental strength (filling the exam pages with loads of gibberish and not giving up) won't see you through ..... You either know the answer or you don't.

Sameway, when you face a younger opponent then you match his power, speed and reflexes, if you cannot then you lose, as simple as that, even if you are on matchpoint and that guy believes that he can win because his return is stronger/he will outlast you in a rally then he will win, as simple as that.

Vs same aged opponents maybe mental strength is relevant as matches can be close, skill levels, physical levels r same, you r both grew up together, so there mental strength matters....
 

ForehandRF

Hall of Fame
Fed was toying with the field in 2006 on HC/grass, I doubt CYGS pressure would have fazed him. In general, Fed's problem was dealing with Djokodal specifically (especially once the age gap started working in their favour) not the big stage pressure per say, he wouldn't have won 20 slams otherwise.

People forget that Fed used to be a tough cookie mentally in his peak years, he had ridiculous amount of confidence.
To think that the pressure got the better of him in that 2006 RG Final, otherwise Nadal didn't played as well as in Rome or Monte Carlo.Fed somewhow couldn't get over the Rome loss and already lacked the belief that he can beat Nadal on clay BO5.It was indeed the biggest opportunity to achieve the CYGS :D
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
Wrong .... FALSE !!!



Medvedev did not take advantage of any pressure..... Novak was Old/tired and deflated throughout the year, it only became worse enough to catch up with him at USO

First of all Novak's level at AO was not comparable any peak versions of any champ, he was injured, but he somehow pulled it off since he was fresh so his body managed + muggery from youngsters

At the FO he was tremendous, but he was tired after the semi vs Nadal, Stefanos was a loser (a royal mug) who could not win from a 2 set lead, the guy came back from 2 sets down scenario 1 year back vs Novak at the same FO in the semis and now he throws away a 2 set lead ??? This is choking at its finest, not any exceptional level from Novak

At W again a mug field, when Shapo was hitting his powerful shots Novak would look helpless but he won over the inexperienced guy, berreitini was as useless as ever....

At USO he finally was so tired that he could not do anything, Sascha was not upto the mark in the semis and choked it..... but Medvedev destroyed Novak totally.

So this is a problem with Novak's level throughout the year, not mental strength.
And why was it just the US Open of all matches that he couldn't turn around? Right, because of the pressure. Just look at those bad dropshots from Medvedev that Djokovic could never convert in important situations.

At the French Open he was just as bad in the first 2 sets, but he turned it around by playing great, not just by Tsitsipas choking. And don't talk about Shapovalov who didn't even win a set. He may have some spectacular shots, but he doesn't know was reasonable risk taking is. He would never stand any chance in the long term, no matter if he would have taken a set in between.

Anyway, if you saw the match on Sunday and Djokovic's whole body language, then CLEARLY it was the pressure. I don't know what you want to gain by denying it. Of course Medvedev still had to play well enough to take that chance, and he played the match of his life (at least until 5-1 in the 3rd).
 

InsideOut900

Hall of Fame
Again, why are we comparing 25 years old Federer with 34 years old Djokovic and say Fed would have dismantled this field? I mean, 2011 and 2015 Djoker would have done the same, but I am not sure 2015 Fed would win CYGS this year.

The best performances for the purpose of winning all 4 Slams against an average to good field were 2005 Federer, 2011 Djoker and maybe 2010 Nadal if he was fit at the AO.

2007 Federer is also in the mix, but he played better at Wimbledon and USO in 2005, while only a tad worse at AO and RG.
 

Sunny014

Legend
And why was it just the US Open of all matches that he couldn't turn around? Right, because of the pressure. Just look at those bad dropshots from Medvedev that Djokovic could never convert in important situations.

At the French Open he was just as bad in the first 2 sets, but he turned it around by playing great, not just by Tsitsipas choking. And don't talk about Shapovalov who didn't even win a set. He may have some spectacular shots, but he doesn't know was reasonable risk taking is. He would never stand any chance in the long term, no matter if he would have taken a set in between.

Anyway, if you saw the match on Sunday and Djokovic's whole body language, then CLEARLY it was the pressure. I don't know what you want to gain by denying it. Of course Medvedev still had to play well enough to take that chance, and he played the match of his life (at least until 5-1 in the 3rd).
Novak is a beast in pressure conditions, he choking is impossible.
Even on Sunday he did not choke, his legs were not moving.
He tried to break racquet and do those anger gimmicks that normally charge him up, but when your body is not working as good, nothing you can do.

I saw the match yesterday (replay of the whole match), he clearly seemed confident in the beginning but lost it due to the fact that Danni was superior, serve was good especially, thats it, nothing much to read into it..... Novak mentally tough as iron, you must be biased to think that he can be subdued by pressure when his body and skills are working fine?? ... That too by medvedev?

Medvedev himself struggled and got broken in the 3rd set when crowd were disturbing him, with a fresher and stronger Novak it could have gone the other way.

All in all I consisder 2021 Novak to be very weak physically compared to previous years, I donno how people r praising his level... for what? ... because he improved his serve? sure, but overall his energy levels have declined a lot.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Again, why are we comparing 25 years old Federer with 34 years old Djokovic and say Fed would have dismantled this field? I mean, 2011 and 2015 Djoker would have done the same, but I am not sure 2015 Fed would win CYGS this year.

The best performances for the purpose of winning all 4 Slams against an average to good field were 2005 Federer, 2011 Djoker and maybe 2010 Nadal if he was fit at the AO.

2007 Federer is also in the mix, but he played better at Wimbledon and USO in 2005, while only a tad worse at AO and RG.
2015 Fed will not win AO and will certainly not win Roland Garros, even if my some big racquet miracle vs slow nadal he wins, Stefanos might beat him or maybe match would be really close.
Other 2 slams he would win by smoking everyone with impunity, without dropping a set he wins both.
 

ChrisRF

Hall of Fame
Novak is a beast in pressure conditions, he choking is impossible.
Even on Sunday he did not choke, his legs were not moving.
He tried to break racquet and do those anger gimmicks that normally charge him up, but when your body is not working as good, nothing you can do.

I saw the match yesterday (replay of the whole match), he clearly seemed confident in the beginning but lost it due to the fact that Danni was superior, serve was good especially, thats it, nothing much to read into it..... Novak mentally tough as iron, you must be biased to think that he can be subdued by pressure when his body and skills are working fine?? ... That too by medvedev?

Medvedev himself struggled and got broken in the 3rd set when crowd were disturbing him, with a fresher and stronger Novak it could have gone the other way.

All in all I consisder 2021 Novak to be very weak physically compared to previous years, I donno how people r praising his level... for what? ... because he improved his serve? sure, but overall his energy levels have declined a lot.
Well, if you just assume he will always be mentally tough and it cannot be different, then of course that cannot be the reason. :-D

He never was in such a situation, so you cannot argue he never felt pressure before. And on top of that, he DID lose due to pressure before. For example in the French Open SF against Thiem in 2019 he totally lost it mentally from time to time.

He lost it right from the beginning on Sunday. The first break came in the first game, and clearly he mad nervous mistakes. Then Medvedev was (suprisingly) good enough to serve himself through he first set, which added to the pressure. Then came the music incident and all went downhill. Still credit to Medvedev for playing that well of course.

And MAYBE the pressure also did something physical to him. Who knows, maybe he didn't really got sleep the night before his greatest match ever. Still I'm quite sure he was physically ready for 5 sets though.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Well, if you just assume he will always be mentally tough and it cannot be different, then of course that cannot be the reason. :-D

He never was in such a situation, so you cannot argue he never felt pressure before. And on top of that, he DID lose due to pressure before. For example in the French Open SF against Thiem in 2019 he totally lost it mentally from time to time.

He lost it right from the beginning on Sunday. The first break came in the first game, and clearly he mad nervous mistakes. Then Medvedev was (suprisingly) good enough to serve himself through he first set, which added to the pressure. Then came the music incident and all went downhill. Still credit to Medvedev for playing that well of course.

And MAYBE the pressure also did something physical to him. Who knows, maybe he didn't really got sleep the night before his greatest match ever. Still I'm quite sure he was physically ready for 5 sets though.

If your body is not upto the mark or struggles vs someone young who has skills+belief then nothing can be done.

Federer has been a victim of this throughout his life.
 

gadge

Professional
Its absolutely ridiculously clueless to say Serena/Djokovic are way ahead of fed mentally. They are better, but not by a big gap.
Fed was pretty tough mentally.

Also peak year when dominant (06/07) is not the same as 15 Serena or 21 Djokovic.
Serena was very dominant in 2015.
 

jondice

Rookie
I think if Rafa doesn't tweak his knee in 2010 Aussie QF, he wins it that year. He was unstoppable from 2009-2010. Only injury and Robin hurt him.

But it's a silly head game to play. None of them did it. Nole came closest. And that's all she wrote.
 

Tennisgods

Hall of Fame
The achievement of getting close to winning 4 slams in the same year is the same but the achievement of getting close to winning a CYGS was only close for Djokovic and very far for Federer.



Well, you can't have it both ways. Either the order matters or it doesn't. If order doesn't matter, Djokovic achieved the equivalent of a Grand Slam already. If they do matter, then Federer didn't come close to achieving a Grand Slam.
Order does matter in the case of CYGS, it’s just that I don’t think the pressure would have affected Federer to the extent he doesn’t win all 4. People assume that winning the French would mean Fed was less likely to win Wimbledon and USO in those years but I disagree. That’s why I consider both of them to have been just as close to doing it. Both men failed ultimately in a final of course so it’s all a bit moot.

4 slams consecutively is an impressive achievement, but it’s not a Grand Slam. So no, Djokovic hasn’t achieved it, otherwise he wouldn’t have been talking about it openly since at least Wimbledon.

Hopefully, since he didn’t do it, we can stop talking about it soon anyway!
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
Serena was very dominant in 2015.
Very good in terms of win loss, but not necessarily in terms of level/what happened in the matches.
Went 3 sets in 5 out of 7 matches at the FO, including close ones vs Azarenka and Bacinskzy. Down a set and break in those 2.
Also had close battles at Wimbledon vs Azarenka and Watson.
Had a close shave vs Mattek-Sands at the USO
 

aman92

Hall of Fame
When did Federer came close to a CYGS? Federer came close to non calander year GS twice but not the CYGS since he never did the AO-FO double.. Same with Nadal
 

itrium84

Hall of Fame
You can't say that, because we've seen now twice in the past 10 years just how the pressure builds as you get closer and closer to the end of that long road. If Federer had won either of those Roland Garros finals you don't know what state he would have been in come New York. The pressure might have broken him too.
Maybe Fed is mentally stronger than Novak? ;)
 

aman92

Hall of Fame
I do think 06 Fed was the closest. You can be linear if you want to be unnecessarily anal, but remove GOATdal in his epic kit whom no one was ever gonna beat at the FO, and Fed would have done it. (In 07 too)
Assuming he wins the FO and Wimbledon without Nadal which he probably would have... He would be going for 6 in a row at the USO along with the CYGS.. Pressure would be immense but then again his biggest competition on Hard courts then was his bunny Roddick so you are probably right.
 

timnz

Legend
I know Djokovic's run this year was the most dramatic because he took it down to the very last match out of the 28 grand slam matches needed to achieve the CYGS, but he fell at 25/28 sets needed. Federer, actually came closer to Novak's '21 run twice. In fact, Novak was closer in '15 than this year.

Here is the breakdown of how the Big 3 have fared in getting those 28 sets:

Federer:

2006 - 26/28
2007 - 26/28

Djokovic

2015 - 26/28
2021 - 25/28

Nadal:

2010 - 19/28
2019 - 21/28
Federer US open 2008 to Australian open 2010 was actually only 2 sets away from winning 6 straight slams
 

Tshooter

G.O.A.T.
Assuming he wins the FO and Wimbledon without Nadal which he probably would have... He would be going for 6 in a row at the USO along with the CYGS.. Pressure would be immense but then again his biggest competition on Hard courts then was his bunny Roddick so you are probably right.
Why not go the extra mile. Just assume FEDR won the CYGS. So he not only got closest he won it. Add it to his records. (y)
 
Last edited:

aman92

Hall of Fame
Why not go the extra mile. Just assume FEDR won the CYGS. So he not only got closest he won it. And it to his records. (y)
Lol I don't agree that Fed came anywhere close to CYGS.. But if we are talking hypothetical scenarios then yes Fed 2006 potentially could have done it if he didn't have to contend with peak Rafa on clay
 
Top