helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
True, though Federer was only ranked #8 because of the Covid rankings. He was still carrying points from 2019.
Most Dominant US Open Title Runs (Open Era)
- Thread starter Berrettini_Fan
- Start date
True, though Federer was only ranked #8 because of the Covid rankings. He was still carrying points from 2019.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Wasn't there less than 2 months of pre-Covid tournaments still on the rankings computer by early July 2021? And Federer didn't play any of the Covid era 2020 events.
DSH
Bionic Poster
In 2015 your idol faced Souza, Haider-Maurer, Seppi, RBA, López, whom you refer to as a weak rival but being a veteran of almost 34 years, a shattered Cilic who had just played 5 sets against Tsonga and a confused 34-year-old Federer, at night, after the match was delayed for a few hours.
In 2018, as the sixth seed, these were his rivals:
Fucsovics, Sandgren, Gasquet, Sousa, Millman, an exhausted Nishikori who had just defeated Cilic in five sets and a Del Potro who was reappearing in a GS final after 9 years, the longest span in the open era.
In 2023, the USTA rolled out the red carpet for its favorite player with the following rivals:
Müller, Zapata Miralles, Djere, Gojo, Fritz, unseeded Shelton and a Medvedev who was coming off a tough match against Alcaraz.
Those are the "hard" draws your idol had at the US Opens that he won.
bluetrain4
G.O.A.T.
Given that there's only 8 times that a player has lost only one set, that really underscores Lendl's 1985-1987 trifecta of dominance. He did it three times in a row.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
In 2015 your idol faced Souza, Haider-Maurer, Seppi, RBA, López, whom you refer to as a weak rival but being a veteran of almost 34 years, a shattered Cilic who had just played 5 sets against Tsonga and a confused 34-year-old Federer, at night, after the match was delayed for a few hours.
In 2018, as the sixth seed, these were his rivals:
Fucsovics, Sandgren, Gasquet, Sousa, Millman, an exhausted Nishikori who had just defeated Cilic in five sets and a Del Potro who was reappearing in a GS final after 9 years, the longest span in the open era.
In 2023, the USTA rolled out the red carpet for its favorite player with the following rivals:
Müller, Zapata Miralles, Djere, Gojo, Fritz, unseeded Shelton and a Medvedev who was coming off a tough match against Alcaraz.
Those are the "hard" draws your idol had at the US Opens that he won.
My friend, you still don't get it.
You, as a Nadal fan are in no position to trash Djokovic's draws and praise Nadal's achievements at the USO. Nadal's draws are even worse, come back to me when Djokovic wins a slam by playing zero top 25 players.
A Federer fan, I can understand to an extent, but not you.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
I don't remember for sure what the formula was at that point. Here's what I can say:
In the rankings for the weeks of Wimbledon 2021 (those published on 28 June 2021 and still applicable through the end of the event), Federer had 4,815 points. By the way, he was 1,305 points behind Rublev in 7th and 2,490 points behind Zverev in 6th.
Here are the points that Federer had earned in 2021 prior to Wimbledon:
45 in Halle.
180 at Roland Garros.
0 in Geneva.
45 in Doha.
Were some of those points being doubled? I don't remember. But bear in mind also that the only tournament he played in 2020 was the Australian Open, at which he earned 720 points. So, for him to have 4,815 points, he must surely have still been counting points from 2019, no? After all, he had just 270 points between February 2020 and June 2021. I thus think that that ranking of #8 must have been reliant on points earned long before.
RaulRamirez
Legend
20 straight sets, never taken to a breaker. I pray (well, tennis-pray) she stays healthy and approaches that run (without qualies again.)
...
Back to the poll, I'm still ruminating.
Last edited:
DSH
Bionic Poster
Good 'Djoke', but that's just an isolated opinion, pal.My friend, you still don't get it.
You, as a Nadal fan are in no position to trash Djokovic's draws and praise Nadal's achievements at the USO. Nadal's draws are even worse, come back to me when Djokovic wins a slam by playing zero top 25 players.
A Federer fan, I can understand to an extent, but not you.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Good 'Djoke', but that's just an isolated opinion, pal.
Nadal facing zero top 25 players isn't an opinion. LOL - That is a fact.
As for Federer fan, only to an extent, because Federer made six finals in a row, and was two points away from winning six, and that is worthy of praise, because no way he didn't face all easy players, the run is too long for that. But, only to an extent.
DSH
Bionic Poster
Hitman
Bionic Poster
No, about your idol who had some less easy draws than the guy you're referring to.
Djokovic beats Federer and Nadal back to back to win the USO - The hardest of all 8 Djokodal wins
Nadal beats ZERO top 25 players to win the USO - The easiest slam win.
Try again.
Find me a draw that was more easier than the 2017 one, but remember, it must have zero top 25 players in it. I'm sure you can find one to help your idol here. 
DSH
Bionic Poster
As if it were Nadal's "fault" that his potential rivals fell before facing him.Djokovic beats Federer and Nadal back to back to win the USO - The hardest of all 8 Djokodal wins
Nadal beats ZERO top 25 players to win the USO - The easiest slam win.
Try again.
It wouldn't have changed the outcome, really.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
As if it were Nadal's "fault" that his potential rivals fell before facing him.
It wouldn't have changed the outcome, really.
Oh, so now it is about who's fault it was. Why does that only apply to Nadal? LMAO
As for not changing the outcome, well sick Del Potro, injured back Federer, defending champion Wawrinka out for knee surgery, Murray out with injury, Djokovic out with injury....
Nadal's quarter final was Rublev, semi was sick Del Potro, and final was Anderson who was just happy to be there.
Bottom line, if Nadal is your idol, which in your case he is, you are in no position to complain about Djokovic.
DSH
Bionic Poster
9-match and 19-set losing streak on H/C against the emperor Novak Djokovic
Start: 9/2013 until End: Nadal's retirement
Was that the most humiliating chapter of Nadal's career?
Last edited:
Hitman
Bionic Poster
There's no need to argue, if you take it personally, you lose all credibility.
What's to argue? Or do you think it is OK to have double standards, one for your idol and one for the player who you dislike? If you do, I understand, and that is that. We move on onto the next topic. Peace.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
Three very tight losses in a row for Feddy after that five-title run. Ignoring the possibility of a butterfly effect if the earlier results changed, then not only was Feddy only a couple of points from six titles in a row, but he was also only a couple of points away from eight finals in a row (which would have matched Lendl's 82-89).
Then again, Feddy's five titles in a row at Wimbledon were very nearly followed by two straight narrow losses in finals in 2008 and 2009.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Yes. But one of the greatest mysteries of tennis in recent years is, how did Federer not win a single USO after 2008, after being invincible for so long. Baffling.
DSH
Bionic Poster
Nadal could have ended Federer's Wimbledon title streak a year earlier than it actually happened.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
StrongRule
Talk Tennis Guru
Djokovic fan talking about a weak year, LMAO.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Nadal could have ended Federer's Wimbledon title streak a year earlier than it actually happened.
But Federer could have also ended Nadal's 81 clay match winning streak a lot earlier....he had CP on his forehand in the Rome 2006 final and Nadal was a spectator.
Could've, would've, should've only works in horseshoes and hand grenades.
DSH
Bionic Poster
Exactly, I just emphasize that fans only remember the matches where they consider that their favorite player could have had better luck, but they omit the others where (they don't remember or prefer not to do so) they had fortune on their side.But Federer could have also ended Nadal's 81 clay match winning streak a lot earlier....he had CP on his forehand in the Rome 2006 final and Nadal was a spectator.
Could've, would've, should've only works in horseshoes and hand grenades.
It's a pretty common double standard among sports fans.
Biotic
Legend
I'm doing what I can to keep Nadal fanatics propaganda in check. Thanks for your support.
Mustard
Bionic Poster
It would have ended Nadal's streak at 52, 1 short of Vilas' 53 from 1977.
Earlier in 2006, in Barcelona, when the streak was at 44 matches, Nadal trailed Nieminen 4-6, 1-4, before winning 4-6, 6-4, 6-3.
Hitman
Bionic Poster
Exactly, I just emphasize that fans only remember the matches where they consider that their favorite player could have had better luck, but they omit the others where (they don't remember or prefer not to do so) they had fortune on their side.
It's a pretty common double standard among sports fans.
Here, I do agree with you.
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
Rent free lol. Keep coping. Staying on topic, what kit was best...2010 or 2019?
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
Karma really is a b*tch. All that fanbases wounds are self inflicted and as i posted elsewhere i really do pity many of them now. They contradict themselves and dig ever deeper holes lol. 2010 is a year they hate because it was the greatest single season in the Big 3 Era because of the Triple Crown Slam.Didn't Djokovic fans say weak era's didn't exist?
King_olaf_the_hairy
Professional
People seem to be reading a different thread title to me. It asks who was "most dominant". Somehow Nadal leads the poll at the moment with 11 votes, even though he lost 84 games during his 2010 run (3.8 games lost per set), never dished out a single bagel or breadstick, and squeaked through three tie-break sets in his opening two rounds.[SOURCE] That's not "domination", whatever else it might have been.
Vilas lost only 41 games in 1977, the Open Era record for the tournament, but played only three Bo5 matches along the way. Still, lost only 2.3 games per set which is extremely good, and dished out four bagels and four breadsticks. Also, that seems like a reasonably tough draw he had.[SOURCE]
Lendl in 1987 opened with a triple bagel in R1, lost 59 games (2.7 per set) altogether, and finished off with victories over three Hall-of-Famers in the last three rounds; two straight setters over Connors and McEnroe, and then losing only one tie-break set which he avenged immediately with a bagel in his final against Mats.[SOURCE]
So in terms of "dominance" — how easily somebody won their matches within the context of how tough their draw was — it's one of those two years for me. I picked Lendl in the poll, but since Vilas is on zero votes I kinda wish I'd chosen him instead.
EDIT: of course this is the GPPD, so as usual the thread has descended into another infantile Big 3 shouting match, and I wish I hadn't bothered contributing...
Vilas lost only 41 games in 1977, the Open Era record for the tournament, but played only three Bo5 matches along the way. Still, lost only 2.3 games per set which is extremely good, and dished out four bagels and four breadsticks. Also, that seems like a reasonably tough draw he had.[SOURCE]
Lendl in 1987 opened with a triple bagel in R1, lost 59 games (2.7 per set) altogether, and finished off with victories over three Hall-of-Famers in the last three rounds; two straight setters over Connors and McEnroe, and then losing only one tie-break set which he avenged immediately with a bagel in his final against Mats.[SOURCE]
So in terms of "dominance" — how easily somebody won their matches within the context of how tough their draw was — it's one of those two years for me. I picked Lendl in the poll, but since Vilas is on zero votes I kinda wish I'd chosen him instead.
EDIT: of course this is the GPPD, so as usual the thread has descended into another infantile Big 3 shouting match, and I wish I hadn't bothered contributing...
Last edited:
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
All those years were weaker than anything Nadal ever had at the USO. Weaker than Alcaraz 2022 and Sinner 2024 yet Djokovic fans, or a few of them, claim Nadal Alcaraz and Sinner had weak draws.Look at Djokovic's draws from the 2015, 2018, and 2021 US Open and his fans will be ashamed.
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
Facts are a bummer really arent they
- It was a weak year, glad that didn't happen.
Career Inflation Era does not apply to Djokovic, but weak years apply to others.
LMAO at the double standards
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
Go easy on them, its been a rough 20 years really. Dominated by Nadal at the slams and peak Federer then once they departed a brief sojourn in the spotlight then boom, Sinner and Alcaraz happened. Its bound to be frustrating.
BauerAlmeida
Legend
Lmao, if it's been rough for the guy holding every single relevant record and achievement can't imagine what it's been for the others.
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
The thread was going fine until it got derailed by a Nadal hater chiming in about weak draws and not seeing the obvious irony of the posts given who their idol is.
I take your point overall, but i think people tend to remember later rounds when they think domination, i.e from QF onwards. Many people dont watch slams until the later rounds
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
timing is everything. I could win the most club championships at my tennis club if i played on after the guys who kept winning before me and beating me left the club.
TheFifthSet
G.O.A.T.
Definitely sticks out like a sore thumb (edit: Hitman beat me to it) from the surrounding years. Federer, Djokovic and Murray were all slumping for large parts of the year, Delpo was injured, Roddick was useless after Miami and Davy’s last real stand as a top player was the AO. That’s the Top 7 of ‘09 other than Nadal, and all of them had worse years in 2010.
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
TheFifthSet
G.O.A.T.
Djokovic and Federer made the SF at the USO
Yes they are good players even when they are slumping for their standards. They won one title in a combined 14(ish) months from Spring to Fall.
Edit: make it 16; one title from February to October.
Last edited:
messiahrobins
G.O.A.T.
2010 was way stronger than 2015, 2021 2023. Ultimately the Big 4 in 2010 were all ranked in the top 4!
TheFifthSet
G.O.A.T.
Stronger than 2021 and 2023 I’d say. Not sure what that has to do with my original post though.
BauerAlmeida
Legend
It's gotta be Mac '79.
Federer 2006 and Djokovic 2018 deserve a mention too, although they dropped two sets, given that in both cases one was in a tie-break and they were never really in trouble. Especially in Djokovic's case being that it was in the first two matches.
Federer 2006 and Djokovic 2018 deserve a mention too, although they dropped two sets, given that in both cases one was in a tie-break and they were never really in trouble. Especially in Djokovic's case being that it was in the first two matches.
But both Vilas in 1977 and Lendl in 1987 had to save multiple set points to avoid going down two sets to one in the final. I don't see how either could qualify as the most dominant.
OTOH, McEnroe in 1979 was never in danger of losing 2 sets in any match and didn't drop a set after the second round.
Moose Malloy
G.O.A.T.
He also had 2 walkovers(ok one walkover and one 3 game "match") Only having to play 5 matches makes it an unfair comparison to any of the other runs. And losing one set in 7 matches is better than losing 1 set in 5 matches. '86 Lendl is more dominant(who cares about his one set loss to Leconte, it was meaningless esp since the match was very one sided)
Last edited:
bluetrain4
G.O.A.T.
Fun Fact: His set losses were to Yzaga in the 4th Round in 1985, Leconte in the QF in 1986, and Wilander in the final in 1987 (which was already mentioned).
Moose Malloy
G.O.A.T.
I doubt the majority of this board were even alive in '87. There were a lot of comments in the best RG final poll where posters said "'84 and '99 RG were before my time, so I can't judge how great they were etc" Mac would probably lose a best volley poll to Nadal or Alcaraz here.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
Hitman
Bionic Poster
You really do have a weak memory, don't you? This was a post I made to you specifically.
I'm sure you don't need me to explain it further. But please tell me about double standards, when I say 2010, 2015 and 2006 are equal in strength.
Don't confuse me saying what years are strong and weak to the value to titles, they are all the same.
Similar threads
