The Absolute Nightmare magical Wimbledon draw

[Megafanoftennis100]

I came up from what is probably the most challenging Wimbledon draw ever for a player to do through to win the title:
1st round - 2023 Carlos Alcaraz
2nd round - 2013 Andy Murray
3rd round - 1996 Richard Krajicek
4th round - 1999 Pete Sampras
Quarters - 2008 Rafael Nadal
Semis - 2015 Novak Djokovic
Finals - 2006 Roger Federer

The player has to win all those matches within a fortnight to win the Wimbledon crown for this (obviously) magical tournament. A completely, inexplicably monstrous Wimbledon draw if you ask me. The player has to literally play perfect tennis to win.

By the way, this may be off-topic, but in comparison, which outcome would be more unlikely to happen, a tennis player winning this nightmare Wimbledon title or a boy growing 10 cm after the age of 17? Many people say that it is “impossible” to grow so significantly in height after turning 17 and I don’t think it has ever happened in the world that a male human grew like 10 cm after his 17th birthday. Maybe 2-3 cm would be possible, but 10? That would be a miracle.
Just like a tennis player winning this Wimbledon would be a miracle.

But if you desperately had to choose one outcome to consider more unlikely, which one would you choose?

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

by the way, just to make things harder, you only get 8 hours of rest between each match.

 

[ronalditop]

Very good, very good.

You know what?

No soup for you!

 

[InsuranceMan]

?

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

Very good, very good.

You know what?

No soup for you!

Huh? What is that supposed to mean?

 

[Lauren_Girl']

Huh? What is that supposed to mean?

That most of TTW's posters are head cases?

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

That most of TTW's posters are head cases?

Why would you think I am a head case? I mean, I know that growing 10 cm after 17 may be virtually impossible, but seriously, don't underestimate the ridiculous difficulty of the proposed Wimbledon draw. Even beating 2006 Federer alone is an absolutely legendary feat in itself, but imagine doing that to 6 other champions, especially 2008 Nadal and 2015 Djokovic. This would be insanity to a new level.

 

[InsuranceMan]

by the way, just to make things harder, you only get 8 hours of rest between each match.

No. No rest. No restroom breaks either. Make it even harder. Maybe they all have to contract the flu beforehand as well. Look how hard it is!!!1!1!!!

 

[Third Serve]

Replace Alcaraz with 1976 or 1978 Borg and replace Murray with 1984 McEnroe.

 

[alexio]

after that elaboration/ur second post i have nothing left but saying growing 10cm is more likely

 

[DSH]

Very good, very good.

You know what?

No soup for you!

NEXT!

 

[DSH]

What was the best version of Borg at Wimbledon, 1976, 1978 or 1980?

 

[RaulRamirez]

Replace Alcaraz with 1976 or 1978 Borg and replace Murray with 1984 McEnroe.

NOW, it's doable.
(kidding)
Maybe, while we're at it, Becker (not sure which year) for Krajicek?

 

[Jonesy]

Fed in a final is no good against a decent opponent that went to hell and came back, Fed would choke badly, replace him for Sampras.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

By the way, this may be off-topic, but in comparison, which outcome would be more unlikely to happen, a tennis player winning this nightmare Wimbledon title or a boy growing 10 cm after the age of 17? Many people say that it is “impossible” to grow so significantly in height after turning 17 and I don’t think it has ever happened in the world that a male human grew like 10 cm after his 17th birthday. Maybe 2-3 cm would be possible, but 10? That would be a miracle.

Not sure what this has to do with tennis but I remember from the Guiness book of 1999 that there was a guy Adam Rainer who measured 1.18m at the age of 18 and then got a growth spurt in his 20s such that he measured 2.18m at age 30. So way more than the 10cm.

 

[mahatma]

As some users here pointed - Pete for Finals, Federer for Semis and Djokovic for Quarters.

Btw who is the player who is seeing this draw?

I would try Agassi or Becker facing this draw

 

[buscemi]

I'm picking 1984 McEnroe and 1994 Sampras to take the title.

 

[helterskelter]

NOW, it's doable.
(kidding)
Maybe, while we're at it, Becker (not sure which year) for Krajicek?

86 or 89 for Becker. Krajicek did play very well though. But yes.

 

[buscemi]

86 or 89 for Becker. Krajicek did play very well though. But yes.

It's also unclear what version of these opponents this player (like Becker) is getting. This draw has the player facing Krajicek in the third round. In the third round in 1996, Krajicek played a pretty mediocre match, beating Brett Steven 7-6, 6-7, 6-4, 6-2. Is that the version of Krajicek this player gets? The QF version who beat Sampras? The finals version who beat Washington?

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

It's also unclear what version of these opponents this player (like Becker) is getting. This draw has the player facing Krajicek in the third round. In the third round in 1996, Krajicek played a pretty mediocre match, beating Brett Steven 7-6, 6-7, 6-4, 6-2. Is that the version of Krajicek this player gets? The QF version who beat Sampras? The finals version who beat Washington?

If it is Krajicek from the 96 QF and Pete from the 99 final then nobody in tennis history comes through them. Both are legit candidates for highest level ever. You would need a Pete 95 final or Fed 2005 to even have a chance. But two consecutive GOAT performances? Sorry can’t see it happening and if yes, then there is 2008 Nadal waiting.

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

If it is Krajicek from the 96 QF and Pete from the 99 final then nobody in tennis history comes through them. Both are legit candidates for highest level ever. You would need a Pete 95 final or Fed 2005 to even have a chance. But two consecutive GOAT performances? Sorry can’t see it happening and if yes, then there is 2008 Nadal waiting.

Yes, those are the versions I am using. So what is your pick? Beating all those players you mentioned + 2015 Djokovic (finals version) and 2006 Federer (finals version) back to back with only 6 hours of rest in between, or growing 10 cm after the age of 17?
Which outcome seems more "impossible"?

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Yes, those are the versions I am using. So what is your pick? Beating all those players you mentioned + 2015 Djokovic (finals version) and 2006 Federer (finals version) back to back with only 6 hours of rest in between, or growing 10 cm after the age of 17?
Which outcome seems more "impossible"?

See my post #15, there was a guy who grew 1 meter after age 17. So while that was one in who knows how many billions, it already happened. Going through that draw will never realistically happen for any player (ok if we assume a player could try it one billion times than of course, but this is not what we are taking here).
The extra condition with the 6 hours of rest between matches makes it even more laughable. With only 6 hours rest between matches no player in history will even go through a draw of seven times Thomas Muster-like players at Wimbledon.

 

[Megafanoftennis100]

See my post #15, there was a guy who grew 1 meter after age 17. So while that was one in who knows how many billions, it already happened. Going through that draw will never realistically happen for any player (ok if we assume a player could try it one billion times than of course, but this is not what we are taking here).

I think one player could go through that draw, although of course, he would need way more than just 6 hours of rest in between the matches (which is what I originally intended) - 2003 Federer. I think that contrary to popular belief, that was Federer's absolute best Wimbledon run, even better than 2005-2006. He would definitely be able to breeze past the first 2 players, but then from Krajicek onwards, things get tricky. Krajicek had a huge serve that could ace past just about anybody, but we should also remember that Federer faced Roddick and Philipoussis (two of the best servers of all time) back-to-back and defeated both of them without losing a single set. And considering his nuclear forehands, his impeccable slice perfectly suited for grass, and his rabbit-rapid movements around the court (his defense back then was seriously underrated), he would be able to take out 1996 Krajicek and 1999 Sampras in 4 or 5 at worst.
As for 2008 Nadal, this is not too hard to figure out. Even an inferior version of Federer in 2008, who had already developed a huge mental block against Rafa and had match-up issues, nearly defeated him (had BPs in the 8th game of the 5th set). 2003 Federer would get this job done in 4 close sets.
Then, as for 2015 Djokovic, 4 close sets again. But if he allows the match to go to 5 (which does not seem to be completely outside the realm of possibility considering Djokovic's level in 2015), then he might lose due to 2015 Djokovic's mental toughness in 5-setters. But I am still leaning towards 2003 Federer.
In the final, he would face the absolute biggest challenge ever on grass. The monster 2006 Federer on the other side of the court would push him to a very close 5-setter and it would be similar to the 2009 Wimbledon final (except, of course, the match would be played at a much higher level). This could potentially become literally the greatest grass court match of all time.
And then, after the tournament, 2003 Federer collapses due to exhaustion and is taken to the hospital.

That being said, for me personally, I would say that growing 10 cm after the age of 17 would be more unlikely. It has only happened once in the entire history of humanity.
Actually, I can think of another version of a tennis player who could go through the nightmare Wimbledon draw and win - 2004 Federer. He was pretty much just as good as he was the previous year.

 

[Wurm]

4" after turning 17? I guarantee that's happened at least once, just as there was a lad I went to school with who grew less than an inch after 11 when he could grow a full beard.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

I think one player could go through that draw, although of course, he would need way more than just 6 hours of rest in between the matches (which is what I originally intended) - 2003 Federer. I think that contrary to popular belief, that was Federer's absolute best Wimbledon run, even better than 2005-2006. He would definitely be able to breeze past the first 2 players, but then from Krajicek onwards, things get tricky. Krajicek had a huge serve that could ace past just about anybody, but we should also remember that Federer faced Roddick and Philipoussis (two of the best servers of all time) back-to-back and defeated both of them without losing a single set. And considering his nuclear forehands, his impeccable slice perfectly suited for grass, and his rabbit-rapid movements around the court (his defense back then was seriously underrated), he would be able to take out 1996 Krajicek and 1999 Sampras in 4 or 5 at worst.
As for 2008 Nadal, this is not too hard to figure out. Even an inferior version of Federer in 2008, who had already developed a huge mental block against Rafa and had match-up issues, nearly defeated him (had BPs in the 8th game of the 5th set). 2003 Federer would get this job done in 4 close sets.
Then, as for 2015 Djokovic, 4 close sets again. But if he allows the match to go to 5 (which does not seem to be completely outside the realm of possibility considering Djokovic's level in 2015), then he might lose due to 2015 Djokovic's mental toughness in 5-setters. But I am still leaning towards 2003 Federer.
In the final, he would face the absolute biggest challenge ever on grass. The monster 2006 Federer on the other side of the court would push him to a very close 5-setter and it would be similar to the 2009 Wimbledon final (except, of course, the match would be played at a much higher level). This could potentially become literally the greatest grass court match of all time.
And then, after the tournament, 2003 Federer collapses due to exhaustion and is taken to the hospital.

That being said, for me personally, I would say that growing 10 cm after the age of 17 would be more unlikely. It has only happened once in the entire history of humanity.
Actually, I can think of another version of a tennis player who could go through the nightmare Wimbledon draw and win - 2004 Federer. He was pretty much just as good as he was the previous year.

Nah not happening. The very best version of Federer that ever played at Wimbledon of course has chances against both Krajicek QF 96 and Pete F 99, but this very best version would not show up twice in a row (and even for that version it is far from a given he would succeed). If we take the respective Fed versions from 2003: 3rd round Fed who lost a set to Fish against Krajicek who straight-setted Pete? Then the Fed who played a close match against F. Lopez against 99 Pete? I can’t see it sorry.

As for the growing: I gave one drastic example of growing 1 meter after age 17, for 10 cm there will likely be countless other examples. Dennis Rodman grew from 5 ft 11 in (1.80 m) to 6 ft 7 in (2.01 m) after finishing high school.

 

[NatF]

If it is Krajicek from the 96 QF and Pete from the 99 final then nobody in tennis history comes through them. Both are legit candidates for highest level ever. You would need a Pete 95 final or Fed 2005 to even have a chance. But two consecutive GOAT performances? Sorry can’t see it happening and if yes, then there is 2008 Nadal waiting.

99 PETE is a little overrated, he was better in 1995 and possibly 1994 IMO.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

99 PETE is a little overrated, he was better in 1995 and possibly 1994 IMO.

I agree here, therefore I said “legit” candidate. Even this is too strong though, I agree that 95 was definitely better. Agassi has a first serve percentage of only 43% in that final. Given that, a defeat was actually bound to happen even if Pete only got a good (not great) serving day.

Nevertheless 99 F Pete would be a tough opponent for everyone and you would need one of the best Fed-versions ever to have a chance.

 

[Martin J]

99 PETE is a little overrated, he was better in 1995 and possibly 1994 IMO.

That masterclass against Becker was probably Pete's best performance at Wimbledon, didn't give him a single break point and broke him five times (out of 16 break points he created, that's insane against a server like Boris). His SF vs Ivanisevic was imo their finest match quality-wise. Overall Pete's 1995 run was imo his most impressive journey.
In 1999 he was great against Andre, but the other two guys simply had a bigger grass game and thus made his draw much tougher.

And LOL at putting Djoko and Nadal in the later rounds in the draw, after Sampras lol.

 

[Third Serve]

The 1995 Wimbledon final was pretty close to a perfect grass court performance.

 

[ghostofMecir]

I came up from what is probably the most challenging Wimbledon draw ever for a player to do through to win the title:
1st round - 2023 Carlos Alcaraz
2nd round - 2013 Andy Murray
3rd round - 1996 Richard Krajicek
4th round - 1999 Pete Sampras
Quarters - 2008 Rafael Nadal
Semis - 2015 Novak Djokovic
Finals - 2006 Roger Federer

The player has to win all those matches within a fortnight to win the Wimbledon crown for this (obviously) magical tournament. A completely, inexplicably monstrous Wimbledon draw if you ask me. The player has to literally play perfect tennis to win.

By the way, this may be off-topic, but in comparison, which outcome would be more unlikely to happen, a tennis player winning this nightmare Wimbledon title or a boy growing 10 cm after the age of 17? Many people say that it is “impossible” to grow so significantly in height after turning 17 and I don’t think it has ever happened in the world that a male human grew like 10 cm after his 17th birthday. Maybe 2-3 cm would be possible, but 10? That would be a miracle.
Just like a tennis player winning this Wimbledon would be a miracle.

But if you desperately had to choose one outcome to consider more unlikely, which one would you choose?

Please go outside Outside and get some fresh air.

 

[The Sinner]

Anyone going through that kind of draw to win Wimbledon, will be crowned on the spot, the GOAT of all GOATs.