Rafa winning Roland Garros 12 times is the greatest achievement of the greatest era of men's tennis.

#6
To be honest, @clayqueen, I don't think I can completely disagree. The number is astonishing as is the no of 3/4 peats he has there. It might really be the greatest achievement.


But I must say Djokovic's 4 in a row (It's same thing as CYGS , the guy won all 4, and was 2 sets away from making it 6 in a row)

and Federer's five in a row at two slams with 4 happening together are criminally underated.
 
#10
But I must say Djokovic's 4 in a row (It's same thing as CYGS , the guy won all 4, and was 2 sets away from making it 6 in a row)

and Federer's five in a row at two slams with 4 happening together are criminally underrated.
Federer and Djokovic do not hold these records on their own but in Rafa's case, no one else has done it. Saying Djokovic was within 2 sets of 4 in a row is really a non-starter. They could all claim the nearly missed titles of which there are many. You can't credit someone with something they could have done if.....
 
#12
To be honest, @clayqueen, I don't think I can completely disagree. The number is astonishing as is the no of 3/4 peats he has there. It might really be the greatest achievement.


But I must say Djokovic's 4 in a row (It's same thing as CYGS , the guy won all 4, and was 2 sets away from making it 6 in a row)

and Federer's five in a row at two slams with 4 happening together are criminally underated.
Djokovic made 4 in a row winning RG without facing Nadal, as Nadal was injured and out of form. Not a comparable achievement at all.

Even Laver with 2 CYGS is more impressive. 2 CYGS >>> 1 NCYGS.
 
#13
Lol FO was over a week ago and VB still celebrate? Guess that is because they won't be able to do so until FO2020 (maybe even longer)
Fed devotees' celebration of Fed's AO17 win lasted for much longer than a week.

Feb 12, 2017: "Federer Fans! Which victory was more magical: 2012 Wimbledon or 2017 Australian Open?"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...012-wimbledon-or-2017-australian-open.583302/

Feb 19, 2017: "Federer takes Australian Open trophy to top of Swiss Alps"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...lian-open-trophy-to-top-of-swiss-alps.583747/

Feb 27, 2017: "Federer's career performance at the Aussie Open"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...career-performance-at-the-aussie-open.584286/

Mar 10, 2017: "Putting Federer's 2017 Australian Open win - Grand Slam Longevity in Perspective"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...n-grand-slam-longevity-in-perspective.585066/

Jul 26, 2017: "Australian Open 2017 final vs Australian Open 2012 final (which final match was better)?"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...12-final-which-final-match-was-better.595330/
...and more.
 
#14
Fed devotees' celebration of Fed's AO17 win lasted for much longer than a week.

Feb 12, 2017: "Federer Fans! Which victory was more magical: 2012 Wimbledon or 2017 Australian Open?"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...012-wimbledon-or-2017-australian-open.583302/

Feb 19, 2017: "Federer takes Australian Open trophy to top of Swiss Alps"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...lian-open-trophy-to-top-of-swiss-alps.583747/

Feb 27, 2017: "Federer's career performance at the Aussie Open"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...career-performance-at-the-aussie-open.584286/

Mar 10, 2017: "Putting Federer's 2017 Australian Open win - Grand Slam Longevity in Perspective"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...n-grand-slam-longevity-in-perspective.585066/

Jul 26, 2017: "Australian Open 2017 final vs Australian Open 2012 final (which final match was better)?"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...12-final-which-final-match-was-better.595330/
...and more.
Maybe because Nadal winning another FO is boring overload. Federer beating a 4.0 player in a pro vs amateur exho is more interesting to me than Nadal winning the FO.
 

aman92

Hall of Fame
#15
It undeniably is...a combination of brilliance,longevity and unmatched dominance. One of the few open era records that I don't think will be broken in the next 50 years at least.
 

Azure

Hall of Fame
#18
Fed devotees' celebration of Fed's AO17 win lasted for much longer than a week.

Feb 12, 2017: "Federer Fans! Which victory was more magical: 2012 Wimbledon or 2017 Australian Open?"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...012-wimbledon-or-2017-australian-open.583302/

Feb 19, 2017: "Federer takes Australian Open trophy to top of Swiss Alps"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...lian-open-trophy-to-top-of-swiss-alps.583747/

Feb 27, 2017: "Federer's career performance at the Aussie Open"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...career-performance-at-the-aussie-open.584286/

Mar 10, 2017: "Putting Federer's 2017 Australian Open win - Grand Slam Longevity in Perspective"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...n-grand-slam-longevity-in-perspective.585066/

Jul 26, 2017: "Australian Open 2017 final vs Australian Open 2012 final (which final match was better)?"
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...12-final-which-final-match-was-better.595330/
...and more.
Lololol good one.
 
#24
Rafa's achievement is incredible at RG, but obviously not as great as 20 total slams. Most people wouldn't even consider it a debatable point, but most people aren't on TTW. ;)
Well 20 > 12. You have to be ombiliably stupid to argue otherwise. But by that same logic, 12 RGs is better than 8 Wimbledons, etc etc.

All other talk about 12 RGs being boring etc is a matter of taste or lack thereof where logic rightly doesn't apply, because if 12 RGs is boring, you'd think 20 slams would be even worse, and yet apparently it isn't.
 
#28
Laver's 1969 CYGS is the single most greatest achievement in tennis history. Regardless of an era.

20 Grand Slams, 8 Wimbledon's and 7 AO's are right up there too as the greatest of the greatest era.
 
Last edited:
#30
Rafa's achievement is incredible at RG, but obviously not as great as 20 total slams. Most people wouldn't even consider it a debatable point, but most people aren't on TTW. ;)

It's a way better record than 20 slams total. The slam record will be broken repeatedly. Nadal will probably go past 20. Djokovic might. And future generations of players probably will.

But winning 12 (and counting) of one slam feels like an unthinkable level of domination. A record that should stand for generations, like Bob Beamon breaking the long jump record. It's the defining tennis achievement of this era and one of the all-time achievements in any sport.

The fact the you have two active players who can realistically break the 20 slam mark shows how much more achievable it is than 12 of one slam (only Nadal has ever done it, or even come close)
 
#31
To win 12 means that a player has to not only start winning early, but truly start dominating. And then it has to assume that the player will be healthy almost every single year of his career, and only lose a couple of matches at most because before you know it, you’re in your mid 30’s.
 
#33
9 years in a row not missing a grand slam QF is a far superior stat

Winning Roland Garros 100 years in a row would still rank behind a single Wimbledon title

So its really not even the greatest achievement for Ned
 
#36
To be honest, @clayqueen, I don't think I can completely disagree. The number is astonishing as is the no of 3/4 peats he has there. It might really be the greatest achievement.


But I must say Djokovic's 4 in a row (It's same thing as CYGS , the guy won all 4, and was 2 sets away from making it 6 in a row)

and Federer's five in a row at two slams with 4 happening together are criminally underated.
@clayqueen is certainly not wrong here. In fact I will agree it is the greatest specific tennis achievement of all time. However, just like CYGS, it only tells you part of someone's resume. You only need to win 4 slams to get a CYGS and winning 12 RG is probably the greatest achievement of all time, but it only speaks to the achievement on one surface, not tennis as a whole.
 
#38
It is certainly a great achievement, but I think we will need a couple of decades of context to judge how great.

I think the same is true for Federer and Djokovic's achievements. The game has changed so much in the 21st century that it is hard to really compare to those who came before. If the future of the tour is individual players or small groups of players dominating particular surfaces or Slams for longer periods, then a lot of their achievements will look a little less impressive.

12 is still an awful lot though. I would be surprised if that record comes close to being surpassed in my lifetime.
 
#40
Winning a CYGS is not even close to winning 12 titles in a single slam. That is 7 rounds in Bo5 for 12 years! That is, in Rafa's case, turning up for 14 years and losing only 2 matches out of 95. A player could strike lucky in a year when, for instance, his rivals are sidelined and they get a free run and win all the slams. On Federer's best surfaces, he has played Wimbledon 20 times and has only won it 8 times, the USO 20 times and won it only 6 times, the AO 18 times and won it only 5 times. So Federer has 3 cracks of the whip and hasn't been able to win 12 titles in any one slam. That's how difficult it is to totally dominate a tournament.
 
#41
Winning a CYGS is not even close to winning 12 titles in a single slam. That is 7 rounds in Bo5 for 12 years! That is, in Rafa's case, turning up for 14 years and losing only 2 matches out of 95. A player could strike lucky in a year when, for instance, his rivals are sidelined and they get a free run and win all the slams. On Federer's best surfaces, he has played Wimbledon 20 times and has only won it 8 times, the USO 20 times and won it only 6 times, the AO 18 times and won it only 5 times. So Federer has 3 cracks of the whip and hasn't been able to win 12 titles in any one slam. That's how difficult it is to totally dominate a tournament.
Think about that hardcourts have the toughest competition and grass is the most prone to upsets.Not taking anything away from Nadal because his domination at the French is unbelievable, that's for sure, but think about these things too when you're talking about Fed not being able to dominate any slam the way Nadal did at RG. Federer played on hardcourts against Djokovic and this is like Nadal having Borg for rival at RG :)
 
Last edited:
#43
Think about that hardcourts have the toughest competition and grass is the most prone to upsets.Not taking anything away from Nadal because his domination at the French is unbelievable, that's for sure, but think about these things too when you're talking about Fed not being able to dominate any slam the way Nadal did at RG. Federer played on hardcourts against Djokovic and this is like Nadal having Borg for rival at RG:)
Djokovic on hard court is no Borg on clay!

Rafa is as much a threat to Federer on grass and hardcourts as Djokovic is. Why do people assume that Djokovic is the ONLY one who can take Federer on on hard courts? It's better to make a case on the facts rather than just making assumptions. Apart from his AO title in 2008, Djokovic didn't start winning anything on any surface until 2011 when Federer was 30. Federer turned pro in 1998 and played his first slams in 1999 and he's still won less than 50% of the titles on grass and hardcourts. He had plenty of time to win titles before Rafa and Djoker were old enough to challenge him. Federer doesn't dominate any surface if the truth be known.

Federer v Nadal


Djokovic v Federer
 
Last edited:
#46
I believe that Rafa's record on clay, particularly at RG, will stand for the rest of time. He is the only player in the history of tennis to totally dominate one surface at every level.
Every expert report I have been reading across sports is saying Nadal at the FO is the greatest achievement is sport not just tennis.
 
#47
Djokovic on hard court is no Borg on clay!

Rafa is as much a threat to Federer on grass and hardcourts as Djokovic is. Why do people assume that Djokovic is the ONLY one who can take Federer on on hard courts? It's better to make a case on the facts rather than just making assumptions. Apart from his AO title in 2008, Djokovic didn't start winning anything on any surface until 2011 when Federer was 30. Federer turned pro in 1998 and played his first slams in 1999 and he's still won less than 50% of the titles on grass and hardcourts. He had plenty of time to win titles before Rafa and Djoker were old enough to challenge him. Federer doesn't dominate any surface if the truth be known.

Federer v Nadal


Djokovic v Federer
Outdoor hard Nadal 8-3 Federer.
 
#48
Nadal has won the most titles at a slam (12X1), Federer has won the most titles at 2 slams (6X2), and Federer has won the most titles at 3 slams (5X3).
Federer has not won the USO in the Nadal era though. Federer hasn't even been YE! since 2009 which definitely places a question mark as to how great he really was.
 
Top