Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by tank_job, Jun 4, 2012.
Wot chu fink?
(He is on 8 years now).
Roddick has what, 11? Fed should be able to make 10 at least.
He means consecutive QFs in slams.
40 QF? That's brutal. I think he'll slip up once. Most likely at Wimbledon I think. The form he is currently in, and a big server like Mahut can with a bit of luck take him out early. heck, Falla could 2 years ago almost, so yeah, sure why not. 2 years is a lot when you are not head and shoulders above ecveryone else anymore.
Some of the numbers being used for Roger are out of this world.
In the past, merely reaching all 4 grand slam quarter-finals was a rare feat and considering to be hugely impressive. Sampras achieved it once (in 1993), and Agassi twice (in 1995 and 2001).
I don't think so. I think he'll do it at Wimby and the US Open, he might even go into 2013, but I don't see him at the FO in 2014 still playing at a high enough level to make the last 8.
if Fed loses in the 4th round of his next slam, I wonder how long before commentators & fans start talking about his 'consecutive round of 16's at slams'
They'll dwindle it down to "most consecutive majors entered" lol.
I'm pretty sure nobody cares under QFs.
honestly who cares? he just needs to win GS the rest is just litterature
I do care about this record, and certainly the SF one just showed that he was just better than everyone else.
However, the fact that Nadal and DJokovic stand at 11, while even Murray hardly loses before quarters, shows also that the current game of tennis is just hurt by surface unification and dominance by the top 3/4.
I think he will play till 2013 end without missing out of QFs. 38 is almost sure.
In 2014 FO, it will become 40. I wonder if it's possible in that case. He would be only 33
Separate names with a comma.