it's not like he was losing to the eventual champ in week 1 of a slam 23 consecutive times, most of the losses are finals! That the few semi finalists who beat him (all 3 of them!) went on to win the final is not really something he has any control over, so he doesn't really deserve credit for it.
I meant that it doesn’t consider losses. The way Fed played in the semis doesn’t really matter in that stat. It’s purely about him winning enough to reach the semis. This stat on the other hand takes losses into consideration. I’m aware that it’s the same Slams, but it’s a different metric.Er, the SF streak is exactly the same 23 slams, and also includes losses.
It's the same streak. Broken by the QF loss to Soderling at RG in 2010
Can you give more details? What tournaments are included in streak? Who he lost from?
Full streak is from Wimbledon 2004 to AO 2010. Here it is in full:
Federer - Wimbledon 2004 - Australian Open 2010 (Lost to Soderling RG 2010)
Could have been 27 except for Nalbandian knocking Kuerten out in RG’04 QF and losing to Roddick from MP up in USO’03 SFs after beating fedr in R16. Fat Dave also interrupted fedr’s YEC streak at Shanghai’05.
More often, no; more pleasing...see @r2473 ’s avatar.
THAT IS CRAZY.
Novak was just a few points away from 24 straight semis. Do we really think that would have added to his legacy?
18 of 19 actually.Nah, but 16 out of 17 finals in a row in 06 and 10 straight slam finals are ridiculous and GOATY
18 of 19 actually.
Oh, misread you. But Fed’s 18 of 19 slam finals blows my mind.
yes, that would have been MASSIVE
Fat Dave also interrupted Federer's 24 consecutive finals streak.
Of course, since Novak failed to do it, the Nolefams have to dismiss this accomplishment.
I’ve never read or heard anyone outside of TTW mention this
If we are going to look at consistency accomplishments the number one by far is winning slams in a rowOf course, since Novak failed to do it, the Nolefams have to dismiss this accomplishment.
Federer was utterly dominant in the weak era, no one should deny it.Of course, since Novak failed to do it, the Nolefams have to dismiss this accomplishment.
Consistency != winning.
Slams they won:Slams they either won the title or lost to an eventual finalist:
2012-13 Ferrer --> 6
2001-02 Hewitt --> 3
Interesting stat
Slams they won:
2012-13 Ferrer --> 0
2001-02 Hewitt --> 2
Interesting stat
Also...
Slams they either won or lost to the eventual winner
2012-13 Ferrer --> 4
2004-05 Hewitt --> 7
Finally who you play against matters. TTW is improving.Slams they won:
2012-13 Ferrer --> 0
2001-02 Hewitt --> 2
Interesting stat
Also...
Slams they either won or lost to the eventual winner
2012-13 Ferrer --> 4
2004-05 Hewitt --> 7
He's using your own arguments and statistics against you. That's different from him acknowledging the validity of the argument.
Well we all know that in 2011-15 the top players (Big4, Ferrer, Tsonga) lost only to each other much more often than they did in 2003-07...
I agree that 2004-05 Hewitt may have been stronger than in 2001-02 but he won no Slams because he faced stronger competition. Competition matters.
Which match was that?
So you’re implying Federer is better than Sampras?
Could be wrong but I think it was the QF match against Wawrinka at the 2014 AO. Fun match.
Slams they won:
2012-13 Ferrer --> 0
2001-02 Hewitt --> 2
Interesting stat
Also...
Slams they either won or lost to the eventual winner
2012-13 Ferrer --> 4
2004-05 Hewitt --> 7
Federer matches vs Djokovic --> 50
We all know Elo is the real measure of tennis players' greatness. Not the Frauderista eye-test ROFLMAO
