When, Where, and by Whom Will We See the Next GS Won Without the Loss of a Set?

[The Blond Blur]

Since the start of the Open Era back in 1968 there have been 227 GS events held. Of those 227, 11 have been won without dropping a single set by the winner. To give you a different perspective, less than 5% of Open Era schlems have been won without losing a set en route to the title. Those 11 titles were won by a group of 5 men comprised of:

Rosewall: 1x - AO 1971
Nastase: 1x - RG 1973
Federer: 2 x - AO 2007, WB 2017
Borg: 3 x - WB 1976, RG 1978, RG 1980
Nadal: 4 x - RG 2008, RG 2010, RG 2017, RG 2020

Given how rare and difficult this feat is, who do you think will be the next zero sets lost schlem winner? And when and where will they accomplish it?

 

[Krish872007]

Of the folks who are currently active on tour, Sinner at a HC Slam seems to be the likely answer for now. He lost 2 sets at the 2024 US Open and 2 sets in this AO - with a slightly higher level he could get it done, maybe in 2026 or 2027

 

[GRASScaraz]

Stefanos TSITSIPAS US Open 2025

 

[Rosstour]

Nadal, RG25

 

[Rosstour]

What's truly crazy is that Fedal both did this ten years apart, or more.

 

[Carax]

Alcaraz - RG 2026.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Of the folks who are currently active on tour, Sinner at a HC Slam seems to be the likely answer for now. He lost 2 sets at the 2024 US Open and 2 sets in this AO - with a slightly higher level he could get it done, maybe in 2026 or 2027

This is more or less what I’m thinking too. Especially if he gets another USO 2024-esque draw. Ofc this is all dependent on whether or not he gets banned with the upcoming WADA appeal set to take place in April. Who knows what that’ll do to his game should that happen.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Nadal, RG25

 

[The Blond Blur]

Alcaraz - RG 2026.

I’m having trouble seeing him ever develop the error free tennis needed to pull it off…especially on clay. I’d rather he focus on winning a schlem without getting pushed to a 5 setter first

 

[Winner Sinner]

To date, Sinner is undoubtedly the most dominant player on a single surface, and the fact that he is dominant on hard gives him two chances to make it in every season.

I remember very well all 4 sets lost in his last two slams.
At the 2024 US Open, ready to go, he immediately lost the set against McDonald in the first round, playing completely tight, so much so that he even immediately went down a break in the second too, and then spread in the score.
Against Medvedev in the quarter-finals at the US Open he dominated the first set only to lose the second clearly in the score (6-1), but it was a very strange set with a lying score, given that Sinner had the opportunity to break Medvedev's serve in almost all of the Russian's service games in that set.
So recent history at the last Australian Open.
Against Schoolkate, a classic tight set where all it takes is for a service game to go badly and you have no margin left to fix it.
To finish the set with Rune at a moment in which he seemed totally in control, it is impossible to establish how much the illness had an impact, an illness that was certainly having a more negative impact on the following set (the third).

However, I would turn the question around, in which slam is it more difficult to win the tournament without losing a set? I would say Wimbledon where, due to the surface, the serve is much more prevalent than in the other slams, so if you have a bad service game al there are very few margins to make up for it, unlike on clay, and therefore Roland Garros, where if you are the best player you always have plenty of margin to remedy a sudden blackout. In fact, it is no coincidence that Roland Garros is the slam where the most "immaculate" triumphs have been seen.

 

[JMR]

However, I would turn the question around, in which slam is it more difficult to win the tournament without losing a set? I would say Wimbledon where, due to the surface, the serve is much more prevalent than in the other slams,

That makes sense in theory, but the empirical data indicate that the U.S. Open is the hardest to win in this way:
USO: 0 times
AO: 2 times
Wim: 2 times
FO: 6 times

 

[The Blond Blur]

To date, Sinner is undoubtedly the most dominant player on a single surface, and the fact that he is dominant on hard gives him two chances to make it in every season.

I remember very well all 4 sets lost in his last two slams.
At the 2024 US Open, ready to go, he immediately lost the set against McDonald in the first round, playing completely tight, so much so that he even immediately went down a break in the second too, and then spread in the score.
Against Medvedev in the quarter-finals at the US Open he dominated the first set only to lose the second clearly in the score (6-1), but it was a very strange set with a lying score, given that Sinner had the opportunity to break Medvedev's serve in almost all of the Russian's service games in that set.
So recent history at the last Australian Open.
Against Schoolkate, a classic tight set where all it takes is for a service game to go badly and you have no margin left to fix it.
To finish the set with Rune at a moment in which he seemed totally in control, it is impossible to establish how much the illness had an impact, an illness that was certainly having a more negative impact on the following set (the third).

However, I would turn the question around, in which slam is it more difficult to win the tournament without losing a set? I would say Wimbledon where, due to the surface, the serve is much more prevalent than in the other slams, so if you have a bad service game al there are very few margins to make up for it, unlike on clay, and therefore Roland Garros, where if you are the best player you always have plenty of margin to remedy a sudden blackout. In fact, it is no coincidence that Roland Garros is the slam where the most "immaculate" triumphs have been seen.

True to an extent, but it’s also inflated by the fact that the most dominant player on any surface ever did it a whopping 4x.

Remove RAFA from the equation and it looks like this:
AO: 2x
RG: 3x
WB: 2x
USO: 0x

I wouldn’t call a difference of 1 statistically significant at that point.

I think given where it is in the calendar and the fact that it’s never been done it’d have to be the USO. In a vacuum, sure Wimby would probably be tougher given the nature of grass.

 

[ND-13]

Djokovic later this year or next

He will leave no stone unturned

 

[Pheasant]

At this point, Sinner is by far the most likely. Of course, that doesn't mean that it'll happen. But I think that he has a decent change of pulling that off. Sinner is so consistent. And he keeps on improving.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Djokovic later this year or next

He will leave no stone unturned

Quite possibly, he’ll be even older. And with age comes even more practice and experience.

 

[The Blond Blur]

At this point, Sinner is by far the most likely. Of course, that doesn't mean that it'll happen. But I think that he has a decent change of pulling that off. Sinner is so consistent. And he keeps on improving.

I think that’s the biggest key. You really can’t have any letdown in your level, or at the very least you have to keep it to an absolute minimum.

 

[inflation_era]

How come Djokovic never accomplished this?

 

[Hitman]

How come Djokovic never accomplished this?

The bigger question is, why you, with your name, are not looking at how Federer and Nadal inflated their numbers on this, both doubling their achievements in the inflation era we hear so much about when talking about everything post 2016. Or is that only reserved for any achievement Djokovic got post 2016?

 

[dking68]

Sinner AO 2026

 

[nolefam_2024]

Alcaraz is gem hidden in the clay.
Imagine, Nadal won RG 4 times without losing a set. Borg 2 times? Nastasae 1 time. Total 7 times.

The RG is the place where if you play your peak tennis, you can break opponents on will.

I think if Raz could play his peak , he could win without dropping a set on clay. He reached 2023 semis dropping 1 set at age 20. Barely.

If Raz can focus more, get anyone but sinner/zverev in his draw, it will be very very possible. Ruud, he will thrash Ruud. Same with Musetti Tsitsipas Medvedev Dimitrov Paul. Almost everyone.

I have to go with Raz on clay.

 

[dking68]

Sinner on a hardcourt is deadly

 

[Neptune]

The competition must be exceptionally strong when "GS Won Without Dropping a Set" happens.

I suppose "Without Dropping a Game" would be an even stronger indicator, lol.

 

[Lleytonstation]

Calling it now. Sinner WC 24 or USO 24.

 

[Pheasant]

Calling it now. Sinner WC 24 or USO 24.

That's bold, but I like it.

I'll say 2025 AO.

 

[NYTennisfan]

At this point, Sinner is by far the most likely. Of course, that doesn't mean that it'll happen. But I think that he has a decent change of pulling that off. Sinner is so consistent. And he keeps on improving.

He's the most likely but if he didn't do it against as weak a draw as he had this Australian Open (which I can't imagine will ever be this weak again) I doubt he ever will but, yeah, of the players today Sinner has the best chance on Hard Courts to be the guy to sweep the sets in a Slam.

Crazy that Nadal did it 4 times and twice after 30.

 

[dking68]

Calling it now. Sinner WC 24 or USO 24.

You mean 2025 right?

 

[Lleytonstation]

You mean 2025 right?

No, Sinner is my Fav for WC and I think he is just going to run away with everything but FO. He will give that a run though.

Assuming he is not suspended.

 

[Mustard]

The last man to do it at the US was Neale Fraser in 1960.

 

[The Blond Blur]

The competition must be exceptionally strong when "GS Won Without Dropping a Set" happens.

I suppose "Without Dropping a Game" would be an even stronger indicator, lol.

I guess that’s the difference in peak level of play

…And uh yeah, if a player won a schlem without dropping a game that’d be the most insane stat possibly ever in tennis, lol.

 

[mike danny]

The competition must be exceptionally strong when "GS Won Without Dropping a Set" happens.

I suppose "Without Dropping a Game" would be an even stronger indicator, lol.

Dodig and Coaucaud too good.

 

[Terenigma]

Really thinking about this, It's probably going to be Australia 2026.

RG has too many good players on clay that no-one will dominate, Grass is always a toss-up with serve-bots and tiebreaks and US open has (imo) always been the most open Slam. So yeah it'll probably be AO 2026.

 

[Mustard]

Really thinking about this, It's probably going to be Australia 2026.

RG has too many good players on clay that no-one will dominate, Grass is always a toss-up with serve-bots and tiebreaks and US open has (imo) always been the most open Slam. So yeah it'll probably be AO 2026.

Djokovic never won the Australian Open without dropping a set.

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

True to an extent, but it’s also inflated by the fact that the most dominant player on any surface ever did it a whopping 4x.

Remove RAFA from the equation and it looks like this:
AO: 2x
RG: 3x
WB: 2x
USO: 0x

I wouldn’t call a difference of 1 statistically significant at that point.

I think given where it is in the calendar and the fact that it’s never been done it’d have to be the USO. In a vacuum, sure Wimby would probably be tougher given the nature of grass.

I don’t think it’s fair to remove Rafa from the numbers. Clay is the surface where the better player will have the more chances to get a break of serve and add margin to the scoreline. Where on grass or hard it’s not that uncommon to lose a set 6-7 even when playing well because sometimes it all comes down to one point. Just look at the 2019 Wimb F where Federer outplayed Djokovic for 5 sets but lost the match. Those types of things just don’t happen as often on clay.

 

[Dropshot777]

Since the start of the Open Era back in 1968 there have been 227 GS events held. Of those 227, 11 have been won without dropping a single set by the winner. To give you a different perspective, less than 5% of Open Era schlems have been won without losing a set en route to the title. Those 11 titles were won by a group of 5 men comprised of:

Rosewall: 1x - AO 1971
Nastase: 1x - RG 1973
Federer: 2 x - AO 2007, WB 2017
Borg: 3 x - WB 1976, RG 1978, RG 1980
Nadal: 4 x - RG 2008, RG 2010, RG 2017, RG 2020

Given how rare and difficult this feat is, who do you think will be the next zero sets lost schlem winner? And when and where will they accomplish it?

Fonseca RG 2025 . Realistically Sinner in an Australian Open by 2030.

 

[Terenigma]

Djokovic never won the Australian Open without dropping a set.

Djokovic had talented competition.

 

[messiahrobins]

Alcaraz FO2025. Got a feeling the AO loss to Djokovic, and more importantly the stinging criticism he has had for that loss from many within the game (which he has never had before) will be the long awaited kick up the rear end he needed.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

The competition must be exceptionally strong when "GS Won Without Dropping a Set" happens.

I suppose "Without Dropping a Game" would be an even stronger indicator, lol.

Djokovic was close to doing it a couple of times but would lose a set to a random mug

 

[The Blond Blur]

I don’t think it’s fair to remove Rafa from the numbers. Clay is the surface where the better player will have the more chances to get a break of serve and add margin to the scoreline. Where on grass or hard it’s not that uncommon to lose a set 6-7 even when playing well because sometimes it all comes down to one point. Just look at the 2019 Wimb F where Federer outplayed Djokovic for 5 sets but lost the match. Those types of things just don’t happen as often on clay.

Right, which is why I said:

True to an extent

I just think that people exaggerate the differences in the margins between grass and clay. And RAFA on clay is the ultimate anomaly in tennis.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Djokovic had talented competition.

Right, like Andy Mur-

I couldn’t finish typing without ROFLing

 

[TheFifthSet]

If it's going to be anyone it'll probably be Sinner. Raz gets broken too often, even on fast surfaces.

 

[Rafa4LifeEver]

Perhaps Sinner at a HC slam if Alcaraz stays inconsistent & the rest of the tour stays as weak as it is.

 

[Terenigma]

Right, like Andy Mur-

I couldn’t finish typing without ROFLing

He beat the GOAT of tennis for 2 of his slams?

I'm confused, Did i touch a Fedal nerve? I guess that would explain your reply based on the gif you posted. Two players who are barely in any current discussion because they've been so utterly surpassed by Novak Djokovic. Feelsbadman.

 

[inflation_era]

The bigger question is, why you, with your name, are not looking at how Federer and Nadal inflated their numbers on this, both doubling their achievements in the inflation era we hear so much about when talking about everything post 2016. Or is that only reserved for any achievement Djokovic got post 2016?

I agree, post-2016 both Fedal took advantage of inflation era. But Djokovic has been doing for much longer, he was just there at the right time, not because he is any better.

 

[The Blond Blur]

He beat the GOAT of tennis for 2 of his slams?

I'm confused, Did i touch a Fedal nerve? I guess that would explain your reply based on the gif you posted. Two players who are barely in any current discussion because they've been so utterly surpassed by Novak Djokovic. Feelsbadman.

Beat him in 2 of his worst performances ever Joker playing like he was drunk is the only reason Murray is a borderline ATG.

I just find it funny how you can dish it out nonstop, but the second someone zings Murray you get in your feelings

 

[Terenigma]

Beat him in 2 of his worst performances ever Joker playing like he was drunk is the only reason Murray is a borderline ATG.

I just find it funny how you can dish it out nonstop, but the second someone zings Murray you get in your feelings

Nah, I accept The "Big 3" are better than Murray and I'm more than willing to take the shade that comes with that but you seem to triggered by me implying that Sinner's competition is trash compared to Murray having to play the best 3 players tennis may have ever produced and still managed to win a good chunk of tournaments. Also I will remind you, Novak Djokovic is SO much better than Federer/Nadal. Paticularly Nadal who hasn't beaten Novak on hardcort in what? 15 years? LOL one trick clay pony who (whilst I accept, is a clay pro) is the most overrated tennis player on the tour.

 

[johnmccabe]

At this point, Sinner is by far the most likely. Of course, that doesn't mean that it'll happen. But I think that he has a decent change of pulling that off. Sinner is so consistent. And he keeps on improving.

Hard courts are tough though

 

[Third Serve]

I don’t think it’s fair to remove Rafa from the numbers. Clay is the surface where the better player will have the more chances to get a break of serve and add margin to the scoreline. Where on grass or hard it’s not that uncommon to lose a set 6-7 even when playing well because sometimes it all comes down to one point. Just look at the 2019 Wimb F where Federer outplayed Djokovic for 5 sets but lost the match. Those types of things just don’t happen as often on clay.

Or better yet, look at the 1995 final which was probably the best match Pete ever played and yet he still lost a set because it’s tough to lock down sets against big servers like Becker on grass.

Or the 2003 SF where Fed played some of his best grass court tennis but still almost lost the first set to Roddick.

The 2009 and 2014 finals are other nice matches to prove this point. The eventual winner had the much better of play but both still dragged out to five sets.

 

[The Blond Blur]

Nah, I accept The "Big 3" are better than Murray and I'm more than willing to take the shade that comes with that but you seem to triggered by me implying that Sinner's competition is trash compared to Murray having to play the best 3 players tennis may have ever produced and still managed to win a good chunk of tournaments. Also I will remind you, Novak Djokovic is SO much better than Federer/Nadal. Paticularly Nadal who hasn't beaten Novak on hardcort in what? 15 years? LOL one trick clay pony who (whilst I accept, is a clay pro) is the most overrated tennis player on the tour.

I’m triggered because I posted probably the most famous tennis gif ever? Sure Jan. This isn’t even about Sinner. I made a joke after you said that Joker wasn’t able to win an GS without dropping a set because he faced “real competition”. Which is why I brought up Murray. As if having to face his whipping boy in 4/10 AO Fs required some Herculean effort.

And lol, how big of you to admit that the Big 3 are better than Murray. Way to go out on a limb there Someone like Courier has an argument for being better than Murray, lol. If he wasn’t “British” he wouldn’t have received half the hype he’s gotten over the course of his career. You want to talk about overrated? If you looked it up in a dictionary you see this:

 

[roysid]

Federer was asked after winning Wimbledon 2006 final. "How are you feeling that Nadal won 1 set and hence you missed the chance to win every match in straight sets. His reply - as long as he doesn't win 3, I'm fine"

That sums it up. Tennis players don't care or focus on this record. The only thing that matters is whether you won the tournament or not.

As to why it has happened so less, that's because it takes insane domination over all 7 matches not to lose a set. And even then, they are likely to lose a set in earlier rounds where they haven't peaked up.

Example of Djokovic comes to my mind. He was dominant in AO 11, 19, 23 and USO 18.
But didn't mind losing 1 set in the earlier rounds. By the time quarters came, he was untouchable

 

[Aabye5]

Of the folks who are currently active on tour, Sinner at a HC Slam seems to be the likely answer for now. He lost 2 sets at the 2024 US Open and 2 sets in this AO - with a slightly higher level he could get it done, maybe in 2026 or 2027

Has a good shot at accomplishing this at the US Open depending on draw, etc.