What number do you predict the final slam record will be

[martinezownsclay]

This isn't a GOAT thread, although I know it could well turn into that, but that isn't the intent of it. I am instead curious what most of you think the final slam record that Nadal, Djokovic, or Nadal/Djokovic in a tie possibly wind up with will be. What will the final number be. Personally I think 25 is the realistic max, and 22 or 23 is the minimum, but I will include all options from 21 to 30 just for arguments sake.

 

[Snafu23]

Djoko at 22.

 

[victorcruz]

24, for Kobe

 

[martinezownsclay]

I am settling on 23. And I don't know which that will be. I predict one of them winds up at 22 and the other 23, but not sure which is which. Although everytime I made a prediction on the final number, the final number seems to go higher. Honestly even at the start of last year I believed Federer would hang onto the slam record at 20, not just a share of it, but alone, even though I knew it wasn't close to a for sure.

So maybe I am guessing too low at 23. I do see Nadal's loweset possible as 22, as I am almost certain he wins the French this year. I guess I am just hoping it doesn't go higher than 23, since that means everyone else is failing even more than they already are at this point.

 

[Anurag Kashyap]

I am not going to pretend I have any clue whatsoever. All I know is that when they indeed stop winning whenever that might, it would probably be very sudden.

 

[martinezownsclay]

I am not going to pretend I have any clue whatsoever. All I know is that when they indeed stop winning whenever that might, it would probably be very sudden.

What would define stop though. I mean some were saying that when Medvedev won the U.S Open, but clearly that was not the end, and probably won't wind up being even close to it.

So would it be 2 or 3 consecutive slams not won by Djokodal that would define the stop that you believe would lead to a complete stop? Since clearly it isn't defined by 1 slam.

 

[Anurag Kashyap]

What would define stop though. I mean some were saying that when Medvedev won the U.S Open, but clearly that was not the end, and probably won't wind up being even close to it.

So would it be 2 or 3 consecutive slams not won by Djokodal that would define the stop that you believe would lead to a complete stop? Since clearly it isn't defined by 1 slam.

I think a stop whatever that is will be due to them declining rather than anyone else peaking to put an end to their winning like it happened to Roger between 2012 and 2016.
So I think it will either be a sharp decline or injuries that will stop them from winning. And because it will be on them rather than the field I think a stop could be defined as 4 consecutive slems (played but not won) which is a period long enough to confirm that the decline is more or less permanent.
Nadal could probably still win French Open 2023 if he went slam less from now on till FO23. But for Novak to not win 4 slems in a row without an ailment would mean a definite decline.

 

[RG GOD]

If Nadal win RG 2022, Nadal with 25GS

 

[Kralingen]

I predict that whoever holds it won't go out like Pete in a blaze of glory and that he'll instead go out like Fed and have good looks at Slams but fail to convert later in his career.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Rafa wins the next three RG. Throws in a WC and USO. End with 26.

Djoker wins 4 more WC a uso and 4 more AO. End with 30.

This tour is so bad and only getting worse.

 

[martinezownsclay]

I think a stop whatever that is will be due to them declining rather than anyone else peaking to put an end to their winning like it happened to Roger between 2012 and 2016.
So I think it will either be a sharp decline or injuries that will stop them from winning. And because it will be on them rather than the field I think a stop could be defined as 4 consecutive slems (played but not won) which is a period long enough to confirm that the decline is more or less permanent.
Nadal could probably still win French Open 2023 if he went slam less from now on till FO23. But for Novak to not win 4 slems in a row without an ailment would mean a definite decline.

Sounds about right. And I agree it will have to be them more than their useless challengers who stop them. Maybe latest Generation Suck who are now mid 20s, are good enough to deny them some slams on their own while they are still winning, but the full out stop on their winning has to come from themselves basically.

 

[martinezownsclay]

Rafa wins the next three RG. Throws in a WC and USO. End with 26.

Djoker wins 4 more WC a uso and 4 more AO. End with 30.

This tour is so bad and only getting worse.

I will both and at the state of tennis if Djokovic somehow reaches 10 Wimbledons.

 

[Lleytonstation]

I will both and at the state of tennis if Djokovic somehow reaches 10 Wimbledons.

We're watching it happen now.

 

[UnderratedSlam]

I am not going to pretend I have any clue whatsoever. All I know is that when they indeed stop winning whenever that might, it would probably be very sudden.

So you're predicting a huge meteor hit like the one 65 million years ago?

 

[DIMI_D]

Djoker has potential to get
2 more Oz
1 more RG
2 more wim
1-2 US
= 6 more
I think he prob gets 3-4 more
I think Rafa it’s
2-3 more FOs
0-1 anywhere else

 

[dapchai]

Rafa wins the next three RG. Throws in a WC and USO. End with 26.

Djoker wins 4 more WC a uso and 4 more AO. End with 30.

This tour is so bad and only getting worse.

Remove Rafa and you remind me of DjokoGOAT lol

 

[Anurag Kashyap]

So you're predicting a huge meteor hit like the one 65 million years ago?

Well dinosaurs are ruling so...

 

[UnderratedSlam]

Well dinosaurs are ruling so...

You mean the lizard people making vaccines that turn people into frogs?

 

[UnderratedSlam]

21 slams.

Because soon the vaccines will turn all players into frogs, and although Novak will survive as the only human pro, he will have no tour to play on.

No, hitting against a wall doesn't win you slams...

 

[Anurag Kashyap]

You mean the lizard people making vaccines that turn people into frogs?

No I mean the ancient humble fisherman and the metaphysical water purifier

 

[Adam Copeland]

Final tally will be

Djokovic - 25 Slams
Nadal - 22 Slams
Federer - 20 Slams

After Nole retires the Grand Slam matches till Qf in Slams will be reduced best of 3 and only QF+SF+F will be best of 5.
Also a 5th slam will be introduced in this decade itself so that next gen catch up with Big 3.

15 years from now the commentators will be selling the narrative that slams won by players then are worth more than the Big 3 era as the game is now faster and more slams to compete, tougher calender year ......something like that..... Interesting thing is Federer himself will be promoting this narrative at that time

Media drives thought process of the sheep, who better to market all this than Roger himself?

This is a glimpse of the future!