Other (possible) records for Nole

GabeT

GabeT

Talk Tennis Guru
Many here focus on the Slam race. I don’t. But even those that do should agree there are other records an ATG can seek. What can Nole look for, assuming his Wimbledon win is not a fluke?

I don’t know, and don’t really care, if Nole can beat Nadal or Federer at number of slams. I have no idea how many more he will win but hope he will add at least a couple more to his tally. With that in mind, what would be the ideal wins?

One more FO: this would give Nole the dual career slam, something Fed can’t aim for since he no longer plays clay. Nadal could get that by winning another AO but it won’t be easy.

One more FO and one more AO: with these extra two slams Nole would have dual CGS and he would also be ahead of both Federer and Nadal in two of the four slams (Better than Fed at FO and AO and better than Nadal at WB and AO). He would also hold the Open Era record for AO.

2 FO, 1AO, and 1 USO: this would give Nole the TRIPLE CGS, plus everything else mentioned above. With a total of 3 USOs (and assuming Nadal doesn’t win another USO) Nole would arguably be ahead of Nadal in 3 of the 4 slams.

YE1: This one is not so difficult. He needs one more YE1 to tie Fed and two more to tie Sampras. Can he win another YE1 this year? Probably too far away.

Weeks at #1: Fed is at 310 weeks and Nole at 223. That’s a bit over a year and a half of time at number 1 to catch up. Nole doesn’t need to be in Ultron mode to be number 1 and one big advantage he has (assuming he continues to play well) is that he is competitive everywhere. He is good in grass, clay, HC and indoors. So he can win or go deep the whole tennis season and that makes it easier to keep number 1 for a while. And he is the youngest of the Big 3.

Edit:

Cincy: the Real Slam. winning this would give Nole all the Tier 1 tournaments, something no one has accomplished before.
 
Last edited:
tenor.gif
 
1 more RG and 1 more USO would be cool for him to round off his CV. Unfortunately Fed peaked late on clay and only really got 1 shot with no peak Rafa around (2009).
 
Tennis_Hands said:
The CGS/DCGS/and now I see there is a TRIPLE CGS is BS/DBS/TRIPLE BS.

Especially in the today's homogenised conditions, and with the extended career opportunities.

:cool:
Click to expand...

Okay, so I hope you also consider the bulk of Fed's longevity records BS as well since he has benefitted from the same homogeneous conditions.

I suspect you have some excuse for why that doesn't apply in Federer's case though.
 
125downthemiddle said:
Okay, so I hope you also consider the bulk of Fed's longevity records BS as well since he has benefitted from the same homogeneous conditions.

I suspect you have some excuse for why that doesn't apply in Federer's case though.
Click to expand...

I didn't say that their achievements are BS.

I said two other things:

1) that historically no great value has been put on any random combination of the four Majors

2) the main point of the distinction of winning all four is their vastly different conditions, which requires vastly different tennis skills, which is made a lot less impressive by the homogenization

:cool:
 
Tennis_Hands said:
I didn't say that their achievements are BS.

I said two other things:

1) that historically no great value has been put on any random combination of the four Majors

2) the main point ofthe distinction of winning all four is their vastly different conditions, which is made a lot less impressive by the homogenization

:cool:
Click to expand...

Fair enough, if you agree Federer's QF , SF etc records are in the same category.

2 is fine, but then no one has done it except for Agassi and Borg underer less homogenous conditions
 
Nole could also win 8 more majors and hold slam record

Nole could run the 100 metres in under 8 seconds

Nole could climb Mount Everest on barefoot

Nole could also give birth to a baby , taking some pressure off Jelena
 
FHtennisman said:
More importantly, why not another 7-0 win streak vs Nadal including wins at Wimby (done), US Open and RG?
Click to expand...

helterskelter said:
Why stop at seven and not keep going right on to double figures?
Click to expand...
Outstanding, outstanding! You boys are in rarefied air.

Suggest that we take this a step further: might Djoker provide the platform for egress? This is to say, might he do the honors of ushering Nadal into retirement... courtesy of, say, a triple bagel on Chatrier? :)

tumblr_mfxfs7ZLLJ1qiz3j8o1_500.gif
 
125downthemiddle said:
Fair enough, if you agree Federer's QF , SF etc records are in the same category.

2 is fine, but then no one has done it except for Agassi and Borg underer less homogenous conditions
Click to expand...

Those streaks are used to show longevity.

What are the CGS/DCGS/TCGS used to show?

Precisely. Under vastly different conditions very few have, so it is a testament to what the homogenization (along with some other things) did to the meaning of that achievement (Borg hasn't done it)

Also, even for that perfect situation, where a player has done it, and it was in vastly different conditions, there wasn't that much value put on it, let alone double or triple counting it.

8-)
 
Tennis_Hands said:
Those streaks are used to show longevity.

What are the CGS/DCGS/TCGS used to show?

Precisely. Under vastly different conditions very few have, so it is a testament to what the homogenization (along with some other things) did to the meaning of that achievement (Borg hasn't done it)

Also, even for that perfect situation, where a player has done it, and it was in vastly different conditions, there wasn't that much value put on it, let alone double or triple counting it.

:cool:
Click to expand...

There is no way that CGS, DCGS, TCGS are double counting but the QF and SF streaks aren't. Simply conveniently biased thinking from you. I mean, jeez this is an obvious one. There is literally no difference in principle.

Yes only Agassi did it really, I was thinking of Borg winning the 2 least like eachother so many times Wimbledon/RG. Others did it at a time when there weren't 3 different slam surfaces. Since Agassi is far from the best player ever, this is a worthwhile comparative acheivement for modern players in the best ever conversation. But that goes back to point 1, if you think it matters at all in more homogenized conditions.
 
KINGROGER said:
1 more RG and 1 more USO would be cool for him to round off his CV. Unfortunately Fed peaked late on clay and only really got 1 shot with no peak Rafa around (2009).
Click to expand...
Say what? Wasn't his first masters on the dirt? If not for Nadal he'd prolly be the goddam clay GOAT. 05'-09', '11 and a bunch of random masters.
 
With Djokovic (hopefully) back in the picture on a consistent basis, I'm now feeling much more comfortable about Nadal's future. Djokovic knows how to handle him better than anyone else ever has. With a bit of luck, he might even one day be able to break Nadal's unbeaten moral streak, although that does admittedly seem impossible.

FedFosterWallace said:
Outstanding, outstanding! You boys are in rarefied air.

Suggest that we take this a step further: might Djoker provide the platform for egress? This is to say, might he do the honors of ushering Nadal into retirement... courtesy of, say, a triple bagel on Chatrier? :)

tumblr_mfxfs7ZLLJ1qiz3j8o1_500.gif
Click to expand...
 
GabeT said:
2 FO, 1AO, and 1 USO: this would give Nole the TRIPLE CGS, plus everything else mentioned above. With a total of 3 USOs (and assuming Nadal doesn’t win another USO) Nole would arguably be ahead of Nadal in 3 of the 4 slams.
Click to expand...
The word "arguably" is subjective. The fact is, Nadal has won 3 US Open titles and leads the H2H over Djokovic 2-1 there. Djokovic needs 4 US Open to surpass Nadal as a better US Open player. It's also simple maths 3 = 3, while 4 >3. Unless Djokovic wins 4 US Open titles, he won't be 100% sure over Nadal as a better US Open player.
 
125downthemiddle said:
There is no way that CGS, DCGS, TCGS are double counting but the QF and SF streaks aren't. Simply conveniently biased thinking from you. I mean, jeez this is an obvious one. There is literally no difference in principle.

Yes only Agassi did it really, I was thinking of Borg winning the 2 least like eachother so many times Wimbledon/RG. Others did it at a time when there weren't 3 different slam surfaces. Since Agassi is far from the best player ever, this is a worthwhile comparative acheivement for modern players in the best ever conversation. But that goes back to point 1, if you think it matters at all in more homogenized conditions.
Click to expand...

I wasn't suggesting that QF and SF streaks should be counted at the same time.

I just said that either of those shows Federer's longevity.

You better stop misconstruing what I am saying, because literally from the very first answer in this thread you do this in every single one of your posts, and are getting more agitated with each new one.

It wasn't only Agassi. Laver did it too in the Open Era, albeit the surfaces of the Majors were different back then.
The talk about different surfaces should be limited by some time periods, because many people are not knowledgeable enough to go beyond the thought that "grass is grass, what can be so different".

That is false, of course, but it is another matter.

Of course, you are wrong about it being in any measure suitable tool for comparison of the players in the best ever discussion for multiple reasons, the most obvious of which would be in what direction moved the overall speed of the courts.

8-)
 
Tennis_Hands said:
I wasn't suggesting that QF and SF streaks should be counted at the same time.

I just said that either of those shows Federer's longevity.

You better stop misconstruing what I am saying, because literally from the very first answer in this thread you do this in every single one of your posts, and are getting more agitated with each new one.

It wasn't only Agassi. Laver did it too in the Open Era, albeit the surfaces of the Majors were different back then.
The talk about different surfaces should be limited by some time periods, because many people are not knowledgeable enough to go beyond the thought that "grass is grass, what can be so different".

That is false, of course, but it is another matter.

Of course, you are wrong about it being in any measure suitable tool for comparison of the players in the best ever discussion for multiple reasons, the most obvious of which would be in what direction moved the overall speed of the courts.

:cool:
Click to expand...

For the exact same reasons , it is just crazy to see people under value Borg,Pete and Lendl
 
Tennis_Hands said:
I wasn't suggesting that QF and SF streaks should be counted at the same time.

I just said that either of those shows Federer's longevity.

You better stop misconstruing what I am saying, because literally from the very first answer in this thread you do this in every single one of your posts, and are getting more agitated with each new one.

It wasn't only Agassi. Laver did it too in the Open Era, albeit the surfaces of the Majors were different back then.
The talk about different surfaces should be limited by some time periods, because many people are not knowledgeable enough to go beyond the thought that "grass is grass, what can be so different".

That is false, of course, but it is another matter.

Of course, you are wrong about it being in any measure suitable tool for comparison of the players in the best ever discussion for multiple reasons, the most obvious of which would be in what direction moved the overall speed of the courts.

:cool:
Click to expand...

Actually you are misconstruing. It doesnt matter if you only count 1 of them, it is still the same principle of "double counting" which YOU brought up and tried to apply to the CGS etc. I dont think it is double counting, but if 1 isnt then the other 1 isnt either. Be consistent.
 
Folks, Novak is past his prime. He isn’t going on any great runs like in 2015, but he doesn’t need to, because he has already cemented his legacy as one of the greatest players to ever pick up a racket.

That said, I think he can still pass Sampras and Nadal on the GOAT list (assuming Nadal doesn’t rack up more slams of his own).
 
Tennis_Hands said:
I didn't say that their achievements are BS.

I said two other things:

1) that historically no great value has been put on any random combination of the four Majors

2) the main point of the distinction of winning all four is their vastly different conditions, which requires vastly different tennis skills, which is made a lot less impressive by the homogenization

:cool:
Click to expand...
1) not true since winning all four has been a goal of tennis players for decades
2) not true since Laver won the CYGS with even less surface differentiation.
 
Gotta love Fed fans playing down variety of slams if it could lead to Nole or Nadal ever winning a dual career slam and Fed not

Gotta love Fed fans talking of the importance of variety in slams if ever Nadal wins more FOs and gets close to or beats Fed’s slam record
 
GabeT said:
Many here focus on the Slam race. I don’t. But even those that do should agree there are other records an ATG can seek. What can Nole look for, assuming his Wimbledon win is not a fluke?

I don’t know, and don’t really care, if Nole can beat Nadal or Federer at number of slams. I have no idea how many more he will win but hope he will add at least a couple more to his tally. With that in mind, what would be the ideal wins?

One more FO: this would give Nole the dual career slam, something Fed can’t aim for since he no longer plays clay. Nadal could get that by winning another AO but it won’t be easy.

One more FO and one more AO: with these extra two slams Nole would have dual CGS and he would also be ahead of both Federer and Nadal in two of the four slams (Better than Fed at FO and AO and better than Nadal at WB and AO). He would also hold the Open Era record for AO.

2 FO, 1AO, and 1 USO: this would give Nole the TRIPLE CGS, plus everything else mentioned above. With a total of 3 USOs (and assuming Nadal doesn’t win another USO) Nole would arguably be ahead of Nadal in 3 of the 4 slams.

YE1: This one is not so difficult. He needs one more YE1 to tie Fed and two more to tie Sampras. Can he win another YE1 this year? Probably too far away.

Weeks at #1: Fed is at 310 weeks and Nole at 223. That’s a bit over a year and a half of time at number 1 to catch up. Nole doesn’t need to be in Ultron mode to be number 1 and one big advantage he has (assuming he continues to play well) is that he is competitive everywhere. He is good in grass, clay, HC and indoors. So he can win or go deep the whole tennis season and that makes it easier to keep number 1 for a while. And he is the youngest of the Big 3.
Click to expand...

First he has to learn how to win a set off of ‘the soon to be ATG’ Zverev.
 
Sport said:
The word "arguably" is subjective. The fact is, Nadal has won 3 US Open titles and leads the H2H over Djokovic 2-1 there. Djokovic needs 4 US Open to surpass Nadal as a better US Open player. It's also simple maths 3 = 3, while 4 >3. Unless Djokovic wins 4 US Open titles, he won't be 100% sure over Nadal as a better US Open player.
Click to expand...
Arguably simply means it can be argued.

Nole at 3 USOs would have the same number as Nadal but more finals and a higher winning %. So that would, arguably, be a better record.
 
Last edited:
Zetty said:
Say what? Wasn't his first masters on the dirt? If not for Nadal he'd prolly be the goddam clay GOAT. 05'-09', '11 and a bunch of random masters.
Click to expand...

His first impressive run at RG was in 2005. I think he wins the title if he brings that 05 form to that 2004 event.

I actually think he could’ve snuck a win past Rafa in 06-07 had he stuck to his 05 ball bashing tactics (just hit big on every FH). Instead he tried to spin his FH more and ended up more and more dominated by Rafa on the dirt.

05 was just an UFE fest. On another day he can beat Rafa playing like that. Just look at Rome 06, Miami 05. 5 setters, one went his way the other he blew.
 
GabeT said:
Gotta love Fed fans playing down variety of slams if it could lead to Nole or Nadal ever winning a dual career slam and Fed not

Gotta love Fed fans talking of the importance of variety in slams if ever Nadal wins more FOs and gets close to or beats Fed’s slam record
Click to expand...

Novak does not need to achieve anything more vis-a-vis Nadal and Fed. He has done enough to cement his legacy and does not need any specific slam

Becauae of what Fedal already accomplished, Novak will always be the third best.
 
tennisaddict said:
Novak does not need to achieve anything more vis-a-vis Nadal and Fed. He has done enough to cement his legacy and does not need any specific slam

Becauae of what Fedal already accomplished, Novak will always be the third best.
Click to expand...
We shall see
 
125downthemiddle said:
Okay, so I hope you also consider the bulk of Fed's longevity records BS as well since he has benefitted from the same homogeneous conditions.

I suspect you have some excuse for why that doesn't apply in Federer's case though.
Click to expand...
Not bs, but certainly diminished meaning compared to what it used to be. Goes for all three of them. Career Inflation Era.
 
Sport said:
The word "arguably" is subjective. The fact is, Nadal has won 3 US Open titles and leads the H2H over Djokovic 2-1 there. Djokovic needs 4 US Open to surpass Nadal as a better US Open player. It's also simple maths 3 = 3, while 4 >3. Unless Djokovic wins 4 US Open titles, he won't be 100% sure over Nadal as a better US Open player.
Click to expand...

What if Djokovic won a third US Open beating Nadal en route? Then they'd be tied for titles and matches and I don't see how losing finals wouldn't be the tiebreaker. (I think losing finals should be the tiebreaker rather than head to head anyway, but that's within the range of argument). With three titles each, eight finals > four (or five, if the victory over Nadal were in the final) finals.
 
helterskelter said:
What if Djokovic won a third US Open beating Nadal en route? Then they'd be tied for titles and matches and I don't see how losing finals wouldn't be the tiebreaker. (I think losing finals should be the tiebreaker rather than head to head anyway, but that's within the range of argument). With three titles each, eight finals > four (or five, if the victory over Nadal were in the final) finals.
Click to expand...
I’d take Djokovic with a win alone. Don’t think he needs to beat Nadal en route to do it. Nole’s 2011 run I’d rank above any of Rafa’s.
 
GabeT said:
1) not true since winning all four has been a goal of tennis players for decades
2) not true since Laver won the CYGS with even less surface differentiation.
Click to expand...

1) true, because not in random configuration

2) true, since the conditions even with less surfaces were in fact more polarised

8-)
 
GabeT said:
Arguably simply means it can be argued.

Nole at 3 USOs would have the same number as Nadal but more finals and a higher winning %. So that would, arguably, be a better record.
Click to expand...
But 3 = 3. Also, Nadal leads their H2H at the US Open, which can be argued to be more relevant than the finals.

I still think 3 = 3 is too close, just like right now with Federer and Djokovic tied with 6 Australian Open. Federer has 1 more AO final than Djokovic, but Djokovic leads the H2H over Federer at the AO. So it can be argued either way depending on what do you value the most (GS finals or H2H). I would go with Djokovic, I would choose the H2H over the extra finals.
 
Sport said:
But 3 = 3. Also, Nadal leads their H2H at the US Open, which can be argued to be more relevant than the finals.

I still think 3 = 3 is too close, just like right now with Federer and Djokovic tied with 6 Australian Open. Federer has 1 more AO final than Djokovic, but Djokovic leads the H2H over Federer at the AO. So it can be argued either way depending on what do you value the most (GS finals or H2H). I would go with Djokovic, I would choose the H2H over the extra finals.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure H2H tells us much. And I say this as Nole fan, with Nole having winning h2hs against both Fed and Nadal.

I would look first at wins. And if that’s tied I would look at winning % or finals reached.
 
Nadalgaenger said:
Folks, Novak is past his prime. He isn’t going on any great runs like in 2015, but he doesn’t need to, because he has already cemented his legacy as one of the greatest players to ever pick up a racket.

That said, I think he can still pass Sampras and Nadal on the GOAT list (assuming Nadal doesn’t rack up more slams of his own).
Click to expand...

Djokovic wasted so many chances to get very close to the Slam record.He lost 4 times to Murray and Wawrinka in GS finals.If he had won these finals he would have been one behind Federer Slam tally coming into 2017.Sorry but when you lose to Murray and Wawrinka in GS finals you are not going to get the Slam record.
 
metsman said:
Not bs, but certainly diminished meaning compared to what it used to be. Goes for all three of them. Career Inflation Era.
Click to expand...

That's fair then. At least its logically consistent. Not even 90sclay joking here, but it hasnt helped Sampras' legacy that the guys after him had the advantage of a mor.e homogenized game and maybe that's unfair to him

On the other hand, I do think you can argue Federer and Djokovic are just obviously better clay court players than Pete so is it a really wonder they have a career slam and he doesnt?

Obviously career slam isnt all that matters---Sampras was obviously a superior player to Agassi despite the former not having all 4 slams which the latter as we all know did.

But it still counts for more than some are giving it credit I think.

And even with homogenized surfaces ...there still are major differences between clay and grass for example.
 
Plamen1234 said:
Djokovic wasted so many chances to get very close to the Slam record.He lost 4 times to Murray and Wawrinka in GS finals.If he had won these finals he would have been one behind Federer Slam tally coming into 2017.Sorry but when you lose to Murray and Wawrinka in GS finals you are not going to get the Slam record.
Click to expand...

Didn't Nadal , Federer also lose many slam matches/important matches to Murray, Wawrinka?
 
GabeT said:
Many here focus on the Slam race. I don’t. But even those that do should agree there are other records an ATG can seek. What can Nole look for, assuming his Wimbledon win is not a fluke?

I don’t know, and don’t really care, if Nole can beat Nadal or Federer at number of slams. I have no idea how many more he will win but hope he will add at least a couple more to his tally. With that in mind, what would be the ideal wins?

One more FO: this would give Nole the dual career slam, something Fed can’t aim for since he no longer plays clay. Nadal could get that by winning another AO but it won’t be easy.

One more FO and one more AO: with these extra two slams Nole would have dual CGS and he would also be ahead of both Federer and Nadal in two of the four slams (Better than Fed at FO and AO and better than Nadal at WB and AO). He would also hold the Open Era record for AO.

2 FO, 1AO, and 1 USO: this would give Nole the TRIPLE CGS, plus everything else mentioned above. With a total of 3 USOs (and assuming Nadal doesn’t win another USO) Nole would arguably be ahead of Nadal in 3 of the 4 slams.

YE1: This one is not so difficult. He needs one more YE1 to tie Fed and two more to tie Sampras. Can he win another YE1 this year? Probably too far away.

Weeks at #1: Fed is at 310 weeks and Nole at 223. That’s a bit over a year and a half of time at number 1 to catch up. Nole doesn’t need to be in Ultron mode to be number 1 and one big advantage he has (assuming he continues to play well) is that he is competitive everywhere. He is good in grass, clay, HC and indoors. So he can win or go deep the whole tennis season and that makes it easier to keep number 1 for a while. And he is the youngest of the Big 3.

Edit:

Cincy: the Real Slam. winning this would give Nole all the Tier 1 tournaments, something no one has accomplished before.
Click to expand...

Some of the records lifted are about him doing better than Nadal in a slam or two. I don't see how that helps him in history books but adding more Slams certainly helps his case.
 
GabeT said:
Arguably simply means it can be argued.

Nole at 3 USOs would have the same number as Nadal but more finals and a higher winning %. So that would, arguably, be a better record.
Click to expand...

3 vs 3 isn't much different despite more finals more Nole imo. Rafa defending the US Open this year would ensure he stays ahead of Nole at US Open. Hope he does it. It's his best hard court tournament in last few years.
 
Backspin1183 said:
3 vs 3 isn't much different despite more finals more Nole imo. Rafa defending the US Open this year would ensure he stays ahead of Nole at US Open. Hope he does it. It's his best hard court tournament in last few years.
Click to expand...
Well it is one of the three hc tournaments that he's won in the last few (4) years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TMF
2016 Nole & Murray versus 2017 Federer & Nadal
Replies
20
Views
1K
clout
clout
Artificial Grass
  • Poll Poll
Fed Fans: Rather Rafa or Nole win?
2 3
Replies
103
Views
7K
AlexanderTheGreat08
AlexanderTheGreat08
Noletheking
Can Djokovic french open and complete Nole Slam twice ?
2
Replies
65
Views
5K
junior74
junior74
TMF
Nole > Sampras but Nadal < Nole: Why the double standard ?
2
Replies
83
Views
6K
lucky13
L
N
Federer was no rival of Nole
2 3 4
Replies
169
Views
11K
RelentlessAttack
R
Back
Top