Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Federer, Nadal & Djokovic have had numerous attempts to achieve this.

Federer : Won RG in 2009 but had chances from 2005-2008 & 2011
Djokovic : Won RG in 2016 and had BIG opportunities from 2011-2015, 2019 & 2020
Nadal : Won AO in 2009 and has chances in 2012, 2014, 2017, 2019 (He had breaks up in the 5th set in 2012 & 2017, got injured in 2014)

I think the last male player to do it was Rod Laver. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
The culprit is usually Roland Garros. Getting one is difficult enough. Two, or more, you need to be a specialist.

Sent from my LGL84VL using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
89 Posts
Wawrinka.
Wawrinka won the final of RG2015 to Djokovic.
Wawrinka won the final of AO2014 to Nadal.
He is the witcher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
440 Posts
The cursed one is only Rafa! I will justify why.

Roger: He first won his RG in '09. This means that he was in contention for a second CGS only from then onwards. He only reached one more RG finals but lost without actually looking like winning. Can't say he was cursed because he wasn't favoured to win anyway.

Novak: Same case as Roger! He won it first in '16, and reached only one more final which was this year and never looked like winning it. It is true that he came close to a virtual RG title in '13, but nobody knows if he would have been motivated enough to win a second one if he had won that. Moreover, it was not in the finals, so too many ifs and buts.

Rafa: Technically, he has been in contention for the DCGS in AO '14, AO '17, and AO '19. However, we can assume that had he won AO '12, he would have completed the DCGS at USO '13 (independent of the AO, he would still have won atleast a second USO given that he actually won three more). So, he had four shots at the DCGS out of which we can discard '14 (even though injured, we should give the benefit of doubt to Stan who might have won even otherwise) and '19 (blown away by Novak). The other two were painful losses where he was up a break in the fifth. These are the closest anybody has been to a DCGS in the open era. He is the most cursed one and the one who has come closest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
The cursed one is only Rafa! I will justify why.

Roger: He first won his RG in '09. This means that he was in contention for a second CGS only from then onwards. He only reached one more RG finals but lost without actually looking like winning. Can't say he was cursed because he wasn't favoured to win anyway.

Novak: Same case as Roger! He won it first in '16, and reached only one more final which was this year and never looked like winning it. It is true that he came close to a virtual RG title in '13, but nobody knows if he would have been motivated enough to win a second one if he had won that. Moreover, it was not in the finals, so too many ifs and buts.

Rafa: Technically, he has been in contention for the DCGS in AO '14, AO '17, and AO '19. However, we can assume that had he won AO '12, he would have completed the DCGS at USO '13 (independent of the AO, he would still have won atleast a second USO given that he actually won three more). So, he had four shots at the DCGS out of which we can discard '14 (even though injured, we should give the benefit of doubt to Stan who might have won even otherwise) and '19 (blown away by Novak). The other two were painful losses where he was up a break in the fifth. These are the closest anybody has been to a DCGS in the open era. He is the most cursed one and the one who has come closest.
True Nadal Has Suffered The Most
 
  • Like
Reactions: El_Toro

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
The cursed one is only Rafa! I will justify why.

Roger: He first won his RG in '09. This means that he was in contention for a second CGS only from then onwards. He only reached one more RG finals but lost without actually looking like winning. Can't say he was cursed because he wasn't favoured to win anyway.

Novak: Same case as Roger! He won it first in '16, and reached only one more final which was this year and never looked like winning it. It is true that he came close to a virtual RG title in '13, but nobody knows if he would have been motivated enough to win a second one if he had won that. Moreover, it was not in the finals, so too many ifs and buts.

Rafa: Technically, he has been in contention for the DCGS in AO '14, AO '17, and AO '19. However, we can assume that had he won AO '12, he would have completed the DCGS at USO '13 (independent of the AO, he would still have won atleast a second USO given that he actually won three more). So, he had four shots at the DCGS out of which we can discard '14 (even though injured, we should give the benefit of doubt to Stan who might have won even otherwise) and '19 (blown away by Novak). The other two were painful losses where he was up a break in the fifth. These are the closest anybody has been to a DCGS in the open era. He is the most cursed one and the one who has come closest.
Agassi suffered the most. He won all the slams in the 90s when surfaces were different and variation was there. If he had peaked in the 00s in the era of homogenisation, he would've won all the slams at least twice including Wimbledon and RG before Nadal and Federer reached their peaks. Even with the big 3 in their peaks, Agassi would've been more competitive than Murray, and would've thrived on the slowness of these surfaces. He wouldn't have needed to deal with serve and volley specialists like Sampras in the 90s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,796 Posts
The cursed one is only Rafa! I will justify why.

Roger: He first won his RG in '09. This means that he was in contention for a second CGS only from then onwards. He only reached one more RG finals but lost without actually looking like winning. Can't say he was cursed because he wasn't favoured to win anyway.

Novak: Same case as Roger! He won it first in '16, and reached only one more final which was this year and never looked like winning it. It is true that he came close to a virtual RG title in '13, but nobody knows if he would have been motivated enough to win a second one if he had won that. Moreover, it was not in the finals, so too many ifs and buts.

Rafa: Technically, he has been in contention for the DCGS in AO '14, AO '17, and AO '19. However, we can assume that had he won AO '12, he would have completed the DCGS at USO '13 (independent of the AO, he would still have won atleast a second USO given that he actually won three more). So, he had four shots at the DCGS out of which we can discard '14 (even though injured, we should give the benefit of doubt to Stan who might have won even otherwise) and '19 (blown away by Novak). The other two were painful losses where he was up a break in the fifth. These are the closest anybody has been to a DCGS in the open era. He is the most cursed one and the one who has come closest.
True Nadal Has Suffered The Most
Stranger things have happened in tennis more lately. ;)

Serena didn't win her 2nd French Open 10 years since she won her first, and she now has 3 of them, considering it's her absolute worst surface. So I'm just saying... while the chances are low, it's never a bad thing to have some faith, even if just by a little.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
440 Posts
Agassi suffered the most. He won all the slams in the 90s when surfaces were different and variation was there. If he had peaked in the 00s in the era of homogenisation, he would've won all the slams at least twice including Wimbledon and RG before Nadal and Federer reached their peaks. Even with the big 3 in their peaks, Agassi would've been more competitive than Murray, and would've thrived on the slowness of these surfaces. He wouldn't have needed to deal with serve and volley specialists like Sampras in the 90s.
I don't understand the logic here. Agassi barely won the FO. In fact, he was lucky to have won a DCGS. He also made good fortune at AO in the early 00s. What exactly is the cursed factor here?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,612 Posts
No, I think that's just evidence that Djokovic and Nadal are the two greatest ever at the AO and RG respectively (like Fed at Wimbledon) and they're a little unlucky to be playing in each other's eras.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,815 Posts
Nadal is likely to win the OZ open a second time. 2021 is realistic in my view. Djoker being pushed to five by Thiem shows he is very much beatable there. One or two tough matches before Djoker faces Nadal in the final would tip the scales in Nadal's favour. Gone are the days of Djoker winning 2 or 3 tough matches back to back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,887 Posts
no more cursed than winning all 4 in one season.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
There is a reason Rod Laver has been the GOAT all this time, and probably will be for many more years...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,681 Posts
No, it's just a low-probability event with long average waiting time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: florentine

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,028 Posts
Federer, Nadal & Djokovic have had numerous attempts to achieve this.

Federer : Won RG in 2009 but had chances from 2005-2008 & 2011
Djokovic : Won RG in 2016 and had BIG opportunities from 2011-2015, 2019 & 2020
Nadal : Won AO in 2009 and has chances in 2012, 2014, 2017, 2019 (He had breaks up in the 5th set in 2012 & 2017, got injured in 2014)

I think the last male player to do it was Rod Laver. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Federer only chance was 2011, you can not realistically list a year as a chance unless you have already won the tournament 1 time..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Federer only chance was 2011, you can not realistically list a year as a chance unless you have already won the tournament 1 time..
Let's face it. If Nadal wasn't in those finals, prime Federer would've stopped at nothing to winning it 4 in a row. All the top 3 have an infinite thirst of winning as many slams as they can.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,028 Posts
Let's face it. If Nadal wasn't in those finals, prime Federer would've stopped at nothing to winning it 4 in a row. All the top 3 have an infinite thirst of winning as many slams as they can.
My point is thay you cant imagine what would have happened if X player didnt exist.. because you should have to replace it with another hypothetical player of high caliber..
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top