Which of Federer's important records will stand the test of time?

[Sunny014]

Sampras is so lucky that he didn't have any great players in the gen below, except Clay great Kuerten everyone of them were mediocre guys.

This is the generation below Sampras
1975-1979
- Kuerten, Moya, Rios, Blake, Haas, Costa & Gaudio


@PETEhammer How low is your IQ ? I bet must be under 50, you must be very bad in maths/analysis.

Federer won 4 out of 6 slams from 2008 USO till 2010 AO and lost in the other slams in the finals in 5 close sets .... Overall he won 15 slams in 2000s decade and u think he didn't dominate ?

LOL, guys like you are the reason why Pete shall be bashed, Sampras is a nice guy but his fans like you are an absolute disgrace to Tennis!

I pity your existence.

 

[ForehandRF]

Federer didn't dominate a decade. He dominated 4 years (04-07) and then was slowly dominated by Djokodal. His career is 2004 to present, and that's due to his own choice to keep playing. As such, the generation of 2000s is actually 2000s-20s, and one of Djokodal is the dominant player.

Sad.

Wrong.Federer dominated the entire period stretching from 2003 TMC till 2010 AO, where nobody was even close to his overall achievements.Add to that, as another important achievement, he was world number one in every year in the 2004-2012 period, except 2011.So, insteas of looking for mental gymanstics in order to diminish Fed's achievements, you should give credit to the man for this accomplishments, otherwise the anti Fed bias comes to light because at the same time, you are quick to give credits to Djokovic and Nadal.This Djokodal vs Federer it's a stupid thing from all posters who build their narratives this way.

 

[Sunny014]

Your numbers are well off. You don’t just x2 to get the modern equivalent.

Fed’s 2008 was below 10k.

1.9 can be used as a multiplier, 2008 is still 10K+

 

[daphne]

At least be a level headed troll if you still want to put on display you trolling abilities.

Oh, the establishment defence troops are awake!

 

[Deleted member 22147]

8 Wimbledon titles will last for a long time

22 consecutive slam semis, if you count that as an important record (although it is very impressive, it probably isn't "important")

 

[PETEhammer]

Wrong.Federer dominated the entire period stretching from 2003 TMC till 2010 AO, where nobody was even close to his overall achievements.Add to that, as another important achievement, he was world number one in every year in the 2004-2012 period, except 2011.So, insteas of looking for mental gymanstics in order to diminish Fed's achievements, you should give credit to the man for this accomplishments, otherwise the anti Fed bias comes to light because at the same time, you are quick to give credits to Djokovic and Nadal.This Djokodal vs Federer it's a stupid thing from all posters who build their narratives this way.

Federer didn't dominate 2003 (Roddick won a slam and ended year #1) and arguably didn't dominate 2009 since he was helped by Nadal's absence but you can give it to him if you wanna be generous. He definitely didn't dominate 2010, no matter how generous you are lol.

So that's just 2004-07 with 09 being a good year. Not a decade. Once Nadal matures, Fedster was Finnish with dominating. And once Djokovic did too, he was in the same boat as Murray, basically waiting for Djokodal to exit early or be off so he could eek out/Vulture slams

 

[BGod]

Ya know, if we turn this around how will Nadal be remembered if Novak ends up with more Slams?

He'll be known for ridiculous amount of French Open titles and being a clay legend. What else?

Those Swiss flags are all around the place. Fed will likely keep his place at Wimbledon & USO plus consecutive weeks at #1. Possibly WTF too.

 

[ForehandRF]

Federer didn't dominate 2003 (Roddick won a slam and ended year #1) and arguably didn't dominate 2009 since he was helped by Nadal's absence but you can give it to him if you wanna be generous. He definitely didn't dominate 2010, no matter how generous you are lol.

So that's just 2004-07 with 09 being a good year. Not a decade. Once Nadal matures, Fedster was Finnish with dominating. And once Djokovic did too, he was in the same boat as Murray, basically waiting for Djokodal to exit early or be off so he could eek out/Vulture slams

I said from 2003 TMC till 2010 AO, so next time you should pay attention.No one won close to the number of slams (and not only) he won, that was his era.
Oh and about vulturing, you can see that on NatGeo's documentaries showing wildlife in Serengeti.Here it' about tennis.

 

[PETEhammer]

I said from 2003 TMC till 2010 AO, so next time you should pay attention.No one won close to the number of slams (and not only) he won, that was his era.
Oh and about vulturing, you can see that on NatGeo's documentaries showing wildlife in Serengeti.Here it' about tennis.

And my argument is you're artificially including "2003 TMC until 2010 AO" to make it seem like he dominated from 2003-2010 and sound more impressive, when the reality is he didn't dominate 2003 at all, Roddick ended as year #1, and same for 2010, that was not a dominating year at all either. He lost the Kingship in '08, and got lucky Rafa got taken out at RG and couldn't compete at Wimbledon in '09, and EVERYONE that year knew it. He was lucky as hell to get to #15. So really its '04-07, with '09 being a great year. 5 years generously. Not a decade. He is gonna be either the second or third man of this generation depending on how things end up with Djokovic, whether he breaks the slam record or not.

 

[ForehandRF]

And my argument is you're artificially including "2003 TMC until 2010 AO" to make it seem like he dominated from 2003-2010 and sound more impressive, when the reality is he didn't dominate 2003 at all, Roddick ended as year #1, and same for 2010, that was not a dominating year at all either. So his years of true dominance were '04-'07. He lost the Kingship in '08, and got lucky Rafa got taken out at RG and couldn't compete at Wimbledon in '09, and EVERYONE that year knew it. He was lucky as hell to get to #15. So really its '04-07, with '09 being a great year. 5 years generously. Not a decade. He is gonna be either the second or third man of this generation depending on how things end up with Djokovic, whether he breaks the slam record or not.

You have a reading comprehension and English is your first language, unlike mine.I didn't said that Federer was the best player/dominated in 2003 or 2010, just that the period stretching from 2003 TMC till 2010 AO was his era.It's about the period as a whole, not that he dominated every single year individually.I'm done here, but you can continue making excuses.

 

[Sunny014]

Slams won

2000s

15

Federer

6

Nadal

3

Agassi

2	Hewitt, Kuerten, Safin, Sampras

1	Costa, Djokovic, Ferrero, Gaudio, Ivanišević, Johansson, del Potro, Roddick

 

[SonnyT]

What's the chance of an ATG having 2 sets of twins? Pretty close to 0!

 

[Herald]

Would say consecutive weeks #1. Untouchable.

 

[jl809]

Most Wimbledon titles

Wimbledon and other grass records

In short Federer's most important record will be Wimbledon titles, unless Novak do miracle...

8 Wimbledon

So my pick is most Wimbledon titles.

Most Wimbledon titles? Who would win more in the future?

8 Wimbledon titles will last for a long time

Anything is possible in the Norrie and Berrettini era lads

 

[Herald]

Yep. Still has weeks #1 consecutive which is a tier 2 record, and 5 straight Opens and Wimbers which like a nice trivia card record.

 

[RS]

23 semis in a row and 36 QF in a row will be super tough and will hold up for a ton imo

 

[Herald]

23 semis in a row and 36 QF in a row will be super tough and will hold up for a ton imo

Also a trivia card record.

 

[SonnyT]

Sampras is so lucky that he didn't have any great players in the gen below, except Clay great Kuerten everyone of them were mediocre guys.

The age difference between Sampras and Federer is 10 years. The age difference between Nadal/Djoker and Alcaraz is 16/15 years!

We think of Connors and McEnroe as rivals, and yet the difference between them is 8 years. Fans of Federer tell you that Fed and Djok were of totally separate generations, yet their age difference is only 6 years!

 

[Sampras-Bruguera 1993]

Important? Nothing important anymore. Laver/Djokovic/Nadal are the only ones left with important records

 

[Herald]

Important? Nothing important anymore. Laver/Djokovic/Nadal are the only ones left with important records

PETE has 6 straight YE#1s.

 

[Sampras-Bruguera 1993]

Pete has 6 straight YE#1s.

Yea good catch. I guess that will stand the test of time most likely

 

[Herald]

Yea good catch. I guess that will stand the test of time most likely

Did an interview in 2019 with Novak and Henman where he said that's his greatest record and sign of dominance.

 

[duaneeo]

5 titles at 3 different slams
5 consecutive titles at 2 different slams
10 consecutive slam finals...then 8 consecutive slam finals
23 consecutive slam semifinals
Most consecutive weeks at #1
Defended titles at 3 different slams at least twice

 

[Herald]

5 titles at 3 different slams
5 consecutive titles at 2 different slams
10 consecutive slam finals...then 8 consecutive slam finals
23 consecutive slam semifinals
Most consecutive weeks at #1
Defended titles at 3 different slams at least twice

Interesting that all those consecutive streaks happened during the same time window

 

[duaneeo]

Interesting that all those consecutive streaks happened during the same time window

Nothing at all interesting. Those streaks happened during his peak/prime. Nearly all players are most dominant during their peak/prime, and no peak/prime player was more dominant than peak/prime Federer.

What's actually interesting is a player being more dominant and achieving records/streaks while way past his prime.

 

[initialize]

Nothing at all interesting. Those streaks happened during his peak/prime. Nearly all players are most dominant during their peak/prime, and no peak/prime player was more dominant than peak/prime Federer.

What's actually interesting is a player being more dominant and achieving records/streaks while way past his prime.

Very true.

How is it possible for a player to achieve more than they did in their prime while being significantly past their prime?

 

[TMF]

Interesting that all those consecutive streaks happened during the same time window

 

[Herald]

Nothing at all interesting. Those streaks happened during his peak/prime. Nearly all players are most dominant during their peak/prime, and no peak/prime player was more dominant than peak/prime Federer.

What's actually interesting is a player being more dominant and achieving records/streaks while way past his prime.

They are both interesting, which itself is interesting.

 

[Herald]

"Curiosity meter". But I guess there isn't a two second Google search gif for that.

 

[Herald]

Very true.

How is it possible for a player to achieve more than they did in their prime while being significantly past their prime?

Another interesting question.

Perhaps what's most interesting is how we are defining prime. Specifically, when it is in these players' career.

 

[Winners or Errors]

Interesting that all those consecutive streaks happened during the same time window

???

 

[BauerAlmeida]

5 titles at 3 different slams
5 consecutive titles at 2 different slams
10 consecutive slam finals...then 8 consecutive slam finals
23 consecutive slam semifinals
Most consecutive weeks at #1
Defended titles at 3 different slams at least twice

The QF slam streak is more impressive than the SF one imo.

In fact, the SF would have been broken had Djokovic made the SF of the AO 2014 (lost to Stan in QF).

At least I'm pretty sure it was like this. I don't think anyone came close to the QF streak.

 

[TMF]

"Curiosity meter". But I guess there isn't a two second Google search gif for that.

The gif perfectly describe you

 

[TMF]

5 titles at 3 different slams
5 consecutive titles at 2 different slams
10 consecutive slam finals...then 8 consecutive slam finals
23 consecutive slam semifinals
Most consecutive weeks at #1
Defended titles at 3 different slams at least twice

Crazy how you just list a few Federer's amazing records(just scratching the surface) and how quickly his Federer detractors getting all salty

 

[Djokodalerer31]

5 titles at 3 different slams
5 consecutive titles at 2 different slams
10 consecutive slam finals...then 8 consecutive slam finals
23 consecutive slam semifinals
Most consecutive weeks at #1
Defended titles at 3 different slams at least twice

The first one is perfectly do-able by Djokovic (i wouldn't bet against him winning two more USO titles, no matter how unrealistic it may look at the moment...)
The 2nd one depends on whether Djokovic's current streak at AO at 3 titles is still active despite him not playing this year, if not...then Federer got this secured...otherwise it can also be at least matched by Djokovic (AO-Wimby combo 5 in a row is do-able under circumstances i mentioned above...and that is his 3 AO winning streak remaining active...)
3rd one is untouchable for a very long time...dunno maybe forever...
4th one as well...
and 5th one probably too, but a little more realistic a nd do-able than previous two...
This one you have to explain...you mean defended each slam but RG ONCE? Or do you mean something else entirely, that i'm not getting...Federer had two uninterrupted streaks at the USO and Wimbledon once and then he never defended a title at either event, so i don't get what you mean by saying "defended twice"...If you are talking about Defending at least ONCE, then it is also still pretty much do-able by Djokovic...more do-able at USo, than RG, but do-able regardless...

 

[Tennfan123]

Do bumped Fedr threads go to former pros?

 

[DSH]

Anything is possible in the Norrie and Berrettini era lads

Don't forget the 'coach of the season': Nick Kyrgios.

 

[duaneeo]

The 2nd one depends on whether Djokovic's current streak at AO at 3 titles is still active despite him not playing this year, if not...then Federer got this secured...

This one you have to explain...you mean defended each slam but RG ONCE?

No, Nole's current streak at 3 AO titles is not still active. Consecutive means right-after-the-other, and him not playing this year ended the consecutive streak.

Defended titles at 3 different slams at least twice: Federer defended the AO in 2007 and 2018, defended WB in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and defended the USO in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008.

Hey, another record: Defended titles at two different slams 4 consecutive times.

 

[Herald]

The gif perfectly describe you

>posts inflammatory gif in response to simple observation
>accuses of being butthurt

Interesting.

 

[Herald]

???

Asking questions is the first step to getting them answered my friend.

Encouraging. And interesting.

 

[Oceans II]

@initialize @TMF @duaneeo
fighting the good fight.

 

[tennis_error]

5 titles at 3 different slams
5 consecutive titles at 2 different slams
10 consecutive slam finals...then 8 consecutive slam finals
23 consecutive slam semifinals
Most consecutive weeks at #1
Defended titles at 3 different slams at least twice

Lol at was left of "the goat"... Crumbles and NBA stats, lol...

 

[Djokodalerer31]

No, Nole's current streak at 3 AO titles is not still active. Consecutive means right-after-the-other, and him not playing this year ended the consecutive streak.

Defended titles at 3 different slams at least twice: Federer defended the AO in 2007 and 2018, defended WB in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and defended the USO in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008.

Hey, another record: Defended titles at two different slams 4 consecutive times.

That's not how this works if someone defends the title 4 times in a row you can't say he did it "twice" anymore, because it happened more than twice consecutively! If his streak at the USO was interrupted in 2006 and then he came back and won another two titles back-to-back years in 2007 and 2008 respectively THEN He would have defended US at least twice...same for the Wimbledon! Doing several title defences in uninterrupted streak of 5 titles doesn't count as defending it "twice'...he would need separate streak for that to be the case!

 

[NatF]

Probably none of the important ones at this point tbh.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Probably none of the important ones at this point tbh.

Which seemed unimaginable at one point

 

[NatF]

Which seemed unimaginable at one point

I won't comment on why this has happened...would be nice if the Wimbledon record stayed but doubtful at this point.

 

[abmk]

That's not how this works if someone defends the title 4 times in a row you can't say he did it "twice" anymore, because it happened more than twice consecutively! If his streak at the USO was interrupted in 2006 and then he came back and won another two titles back-to-back years in 2007 and 2008 respectively THEN He would have defended US at least twice...same for the Wimbledon! Doing several title defences in uninterrupted streak of 5 titles doesn't count as defending it "twice'...he would need separate streak for that to be the case!

Fed defended both Wimbledon and USO 4 times each.
He said atleast twice, not just twice.

 

[DSH]

I won't comment on why this has happened...would be nice if the Wimbledon record stayed but doubtful at this point.

Trust that there will be divine justice at Wimbledon 2023.

 

[Zara]

It's safe to say that Federer himself will stand the test of time as a classic and unique player. Just like PETE.

 

[Biotic]

Depends on how important is Fedfan eye test highest hypothetical peak.