Federer and Nadal are setting and/or chasing a number of records right now. Which ones do you think are least likely to be broken? Connors' record number of ATP singles titles? Sampras' 14 slams? or consecutive year-end No. 1s? Others?

Chris Evert's 125 consective wins on Clay (I think that's the record for any surface).

Margaret Court's 62 Grand Slam titles.

Martina Navratilova 167 titles

I think consecutive no.1 will be the first one to go. And Federer will more than likely overtake Sampras's 14 Slams

how many weeks has fed been no1 for in a row? if fed doesn't win usopen and nadal does will he be able to overtake him?

I don't know the exact number off the top of my head, but I think it's up around 130 weeks now.

Nadal can't catch Fed by the US Open, but it's possible for him to catch him by the end of the year. Only if Fed does just about nothing for the rest of the year, though. It's more likely to get close after next year's AO, though, if Nadal does well this fall and at the AO.

I'd also add:

Margaret Court's 21 wins in a season,

Steffi's 377 weeks at Number 1

I also don't think Sampras' 7-0 Final's record in a single Slam (Most wins without a loss in a GS final) will be broken. Borg was 6-0 at Roland Garros, so it could happen.

I dont think anyone will come remotely close to touching Graf's golden slam either, where she won the Slam and the Gold medal in Seoul.

I don't see anyone winning 6 FOs like Borg, and weren't they consecutive? Nadal has two, but it's a tall order though. then again in 4 years' time I might be taking that back! roflmao

I cant see anyone getting past Evert's 7 French Opens, my god what an achievment that was...............Justine has the most potential to do that, but my god its a tall order.......

I can't see anyone beating Navratilova's win loss record in a single season 83-1.

I dont see any one beating Sampras 6 years at number 1 in a row

i think a certain swiss will...and i aint talking about stanislas....

the record is sampras number 1 at the end of the year for 6 years in a row - feds gonna have done 3 at the end of the year and i can only see him being overtaken at the beginning of the year (i.e. during the clay season), He's just too good on grass and hardcourts and will accumulate too many points then.

130 as of 2morro. 30 to go till he catches connors. :pray:

Id have to disagree with you there, as dominant as Federer is, we have seen just how tough mens tennis is at the top and Nadal is proving to be a very determined and tricky custmomer for federer to deal with.

4 more years in a row at world number 1 is a huge ask even by Federers standards and I just dont see it happening.

I have heard that kind of argument before, but is Fed really any more likely to not be No. 1 early in the year than at the end? The rankings always consider the past 52 weeks, so it always includes the grass, hard and clay seasons. If someone takes over No. 1 at the end of the clay season, it means they got the most points throughout the past year.

what i mean was if nadal is to overtake federer in the rankings its most likely to come at the beginning of the year during the clay season because despite being damn good on the surface, its his least favourite. So say next year if he loses earlier than he did at rome, monte carlo, or roland garros it will allow nadal to close the gap (that is if he defends his own points). So say in june nadal is number 1 by a few hundred pts. i think nadal may lose out when it comes to the grass tournaments (defending a lot of points at wimby and queens) and cos fed is just too good on grass, post wimbledon fed should be back on top. AFter that i dont see nadal getting MORE points than fed on the hard courts and carpet....

i didnt explain that well but do u get what i mean?

I understand your point Mkk. I just don't agree. Nadal was basically untouchable on clay, so he's highly unlikely to gain points there vs. the previous year. (Though he could gain pts. vs. Federer, if Fed happens to lose earlier.) I think, if he does pass Federer for the No. 1 spot, it would be just as likely to occur (if not more likely) at somewhere like the AO or the USO, if he has a really good result, where he did not do as well the year before.

Navratilova and Evert have a head to head record of 45-33.

Apparently this is the record for head to head by some distance.

It needs 2 dominant players, who will retain their form and remain injury-free.

I suppose that Federer and Nadal could fit into that category. They've played each other just 8 times in 2 years though. They could feasibly double that rate, and would have to play each other 8 times a year for the next 9 years to exceed that.

Is that feasible, do you think?

Wow! 78 head to head meetings! No, I don't see that happening with Federer and Nadal.

How about Connor's record of Open era match wins. The american leads with 1222 wins in his career.

Federer has 447
Agassi is 4th on the list with 868 wins

Just re-checking my facts!! It was in fact 43-35 to Martina, and not 45-33.. bit of a transposition error there.. :huh:

Chris Evert apparently won 11 of their first 13 matches..(went 5-0 up, Martina won two, then Chris won the next 8!) i wonder if back then people thought that Martina might not reverse a 2-11 head to head..(and then a 4-18 head to head) ?


I'm curious as to what is the highest for the men's game.. :shrug: The Agassi-Sampras head-to-head total of 34 seems small by comparison.

Hmm.. that looks untouchable..

I'd guess that the next might be someone like Lendl?? Can't think of anyone else who would come close, or is likely to come close to that..

yes llendl with 1070 and then vilas with 920

connors 14-21 mcenroe is higher by one...

I dont expect we will see any 17 year olds winning wimbledon anytime soon so Beckers record is safe

Are you sure about that Petlap.

I always thought it was 43-37 in favour of Navratilova - they met 80 times.

The WTA site says 43-35 but i've got The Rivals book about them and i'm sure that says 43-37?

Will check when I get home.

At the height of Navratilova's dominance she won 15 sets in a row! After Evert won the second set of their 1983 Canadian Open Final she didn't win another until the 1984 US Open Final!

I can't see anyone beating Borg's 3 consecutive back-to-back FO-W titles any time soon.
Also, Borg lost just 2 matches at the FO with a career win/loss of 49-2. So far Nadal has a 100% record there but I don't believe he'll beat Borg's record.
And Laver's 2 GS record should be safe for a very long time.

Hi GS2 :D

I first read about that in 'Ace' tennis magazine, and then checked it out on the WTA site...:)

Maybe they are both wrong?? Neither of them ought to be taken as gospel, so your source might well be right..

I do remember the extent of Martina's dominance.. Chris couldn't get near her over that period.. must have been galling to reach yet another final to know that your prospective opponent pretty much had you in their pocket over that period.. :yikes:

how was your next day's work after your rather entertaining afternoon yesterday?? Sounds like everyone kind of loosened up a little, in a manner of speaking.. Having just consumed a little more wine than I am used to at a very artsy book launch, could be in danger of yacking in the way that I know I can with a few drinks in me.. :wine:

I don't see anyone breaking Nadal's record for consecutive wins against Federer . . .

Good point nick..

I can't remember the last time that Federer got beaten in straight sets either.. That must be a very long time ago. I wonder what the record is for that??

Record number of matches without being beaten in straight sets, I mean :blush:

I got what you meant, petalp.

I don't know what the record is, but I think Fed's last straight-sets loss was RG '04, so more than two years ago.

Hey Petlap

I must be getting forgetful in my old age (all of 28!) since I completely forgot to check my book. I'll have to check over the weekend - I just have this nagging feeling that it's 43-37 but can't see why the WTA site would be wrong, oh well.

Work was fine - long lunches down the pub are not exactly regular occurances but their not that unusual either so people are used to it really though normally on a Friday afternoon not a Wednesday :whistle:. I think I did most of my babbling on this board anyway!

Hope you survived the wine!

:wine:

:cheers:

I don't know if anybody's mentioned this before but Federer set a new open era record of 5 Slam finals in a row. Any guesses on how far he will take that record, injuries permitting ? Its difficult to imagine anybody beating him before the finals of the USO this year.

If Federer beats Mathieu tomorrow, he will set a new ATP ranking points record (beating his own highest score of 7275.) Were he to win the tournament, his ranking score would reach 7760 points, 1000 more than Sampras ever achieved (after correcting for the newer system, but he this was a spike rather than a plateau.) While it is highly unlikely, were Federer to defend Cincinatti and US Open and doesn't get injured, he could end the year with 8000 points.

Wow.. whenever I do visit the ATP site (which is rather frequent!) I am always initially drawn to the ranking points as they are so prominent on the site. I always think of how amazing Fed's points tally is.. It is a fantastic achievement..:ok:

There's 2 records held by Vilas which I don't think will be broken. The longest winning streak (50 matches) and most tournament wins in a calendar year (16 wins).

I didn't realise until the other day that during Vilas's unbeaten run on clay, he never once faced Borg. Borg regularly murdered on the red stuff so I have to say, Nadal's streak is all the more impressive.

Borgs French Open record will be very difficult to beat , even more so as he never actually defended his last title.

I think three of Hingis' records will stay for a longtime:
Youngest Wimbledon Champion (when she won @ 15)
Youngest World No. 1
Youngest Junior Grand Slam Champion