Roger's 5-setter

It has now been 36 consecutive slams that Roger reached QF or better. But it was relatively close today. I was in the mood for some trivia, so I had a look at some of the other Roger's close matches during this streak. During the streak, he faced (including walkovers) 36 x 4 = 144 opponents in the first four rounds of slams. Today was the ninth time one of these matches went to five sets. Roger was obviously lucky enough to win all nine, but let's look at how he fared in the tournaments where it happened. The list below lists all Roger's matches since RG 2004 in rounds 1-4 that went to five sets:

Tournament	Opponent	Round	Tournament result
AO 2006	Haas	4th	Won
AO 2008	Tipsarevic	3rd	SF (Djokovic)
USO 2008	Andreev	4th	Won
AO 2009	Berdych	4th	Final (Nadal)
RG 2009	Haas	4th	Won
W 2010	Falla	1st	QF (Berdych)
AO 2011	Simon	2nd	SF (Djokovic)
W 2012	Benneteau	3rd	Won
RG 2013	Simon	4th	???

All in all, I would say it is not so bad, an early five setter is not a death sentence for Roger's hopes in the tournament. Interestingly, Simon made this list twice (as did Tommy Haas). For some reason, Simon can give Roger fair amount of trouble - relatively speaking.

Looking at the table, I am hopeful that Roger can shake this off and do well in his next round. In fact, if he loses to Jo on Tuesday, it will be the first time during his streak that Roger loses in his very next match following one of these early round five setters.

good article SB, least did I expect Tommy took him to 5 in his prime years.

Nice one SB, good stat-herding. I wonder how many of those tournaments featured further 5-setters from Federer beyond the 4th round? And it's interesting that aside from Wimbledon last year, if he got taken the distance prior to R4 then he didn't reach the final.

To be fair to him, dicing with doom 9 times and not losing is some going, especially given how tight many of those matches were. Falla at Wimbledon and Haas at RG were on a knife-edge, as was the Benne match last year. Some of them are from two sets down - Berdych stands out, I remember how pumped up Fed was during that match towards the end.

Interesting stats. I didn't think Rog would have much trouble with Simon and that his big test would come against JWT.
Funnily enough, I know fancy his chances more against Tsonga. He's had the tough match already and should not be phased if he gets into any difficulties with JWT.
Having said that, it's still going to be a tricky quarter final.

Agreed sfp .... the Simon match brought up his 900th career win, but without doubt a more demanding test v Tsonga lies ahead for 901

JWT will not only have gained a lot of 'clay confidence' after pushing Novak so very very close last year, but he is of course also in great shape coming into this QF. Plus, a noisy home crowd behind him. In short, Federer will need to be a fair bit better than he was against Simon, or it's all over ........

Great research on the stats summerblues

In similar vein, a couple of points re the 'streak' worth a mention :

The next closest to Federer's 36 tally in terms of consecutive QF appearances is Jimmy Connors, who made 27. But this is counting Slams ENTERED - ie Jimbo did, for various reasons, miss a number of Slams during the run. When comparing like-for-like with the Federer consecutive streak covering every Slam, the nearest is in fact our current Number One, a certain Novak Djokovic with 16. So if Novak can stay fit and play well enough to make QF's for a good few years he could at least equal Federer at some point.

Federer is gradually closing in on another impressive record : Most consecutive Slam appearances (Open era). He has 54 including this current RG, which equals Edberg, leaving only Wayne Ferreira ahead of them on 56.

Trivia question : Which active player is currently closest to Federer's tally of 54 ....??

Lots of brownie points - not to mention due respect of the forum community - to anyone who gets this (provided of course he/she confirms that no help was sought from Mr. Google.....!)

Lags 72 -
The most consecutive GS appearances after Fed's 54? I checked a particular player's GS record on Saturday and I think this gives me the answer. As this was cheating to some extent, I won't reveal his name, but it's certainly an interesting one.

Thanks for holding back sfp - as you say, it's not really a name that would readily spring to mind (and there's a clue for anyone still interested in cracking it, although the forum seems a tad quiet atm .....)

The most remarkable thing is the dominance. 9 five setters out of 144 week one matches.

Good point kingraf.

Interestingly, his overall five setter win record is far from stellar. Some have said it's because - when measured against total number of career matches played - he's had relatively little experience of going the distance, with so few players ever having had enough in them to push him that far ....

Not sure how valid the theory is but there IS a certain irony to it ...!!

Excellent analysis.

9 full years of week 2 Slams. No missed events, no early shocks. It's just insane really.

People say he's been lucky with injuries but I don't really subscribe to that, I think he's far more stubborn and gritty than is generally recognised. I guess folk think if you're arty you're flakey, but Federer is a very determined man. Jim Courier was saying yesterday on the subject of all the QF's how it amazed him that he kept it together despite having GF in 2008. He also got past Falla and Benneteau despite back troubles.

It's not just about being a flashy genius, or miraculously fit. He's brutally driven, he just doesn't show it with grunts and flamboyant behaviour.

lags72 wrote:Thanks for holding back sfp - as you say, it's not really a name that would readily spring to mind (and there's a clue for anyone still interested in cracking it, although the forum seems a tad quiet atm .....)

??? pray tell more...

Yes BB, his "easy" (i.e. talent) technique is kind to his body, and he schedules well.
You don't build that sort of record by chance.

Oh he's determined alright, and doesn't moan about injuries.
I don't, as you know, subscribe to the seriousness of that GF episode though.
There's mild, transient 1-3 month GF and there's 1-3 year career threatening GF.
On that occasion perhaps he was lucky.

Anyway, doubt we'll see these consistent numbers again and the longer he keeps on turning in these runs and performances the bigger his legacy gets because he can start to add longevity to all the other amazing attributes he's delivered. If Agassi and Haas can play like they do at 35/36 then why not Federer who hasn't had their career threatening injuries...this guy could probably still be competitive at Wimby/USO when he's 37/38.

Well I was at least hoping for a few serious attempts - or even random guesses - before revealing his name ....

Surely you must have an idea or two lydian ....? And you too bb .....??

I have it. Cheated though, never would have guessed. It's a good one, most unexpected.

Well has to be Ferreira or Santoro...oh hang on, you mean below, not above 54....hmmm

Lopez or Ferrer I'm going with...

lydian wrote:Yes BB, his "easy" (i.e. talent) technique is kind to his body, and he schedules well.
You don't build that sort of record by chance.

Oh he's determined alright, and doesn't moan about injuries.
I don't, as you know, subscribe to the seriousness of that GF episode though.
There's mild, transient 1-3 month GF and there's 1-3 year career threatening GF.
On that occasion perhaps he was lucky.

Anyway, doubt we'll see these consistent numbers again and the longer he keeps on turning in these runs and performances the bigger his legacy gets because he can start to add longevity to all the other amazing attributes he's delivered. If Agassi and Haas can play like they do at 35/36 then why not Federer who hasn't had their career threatening injuries...this guy could probably still be competitive at Wimby/USO when he's 37/38.

He obviously didn't have the latter GF, no question. I believe it impaired him for a period of months, then had the impact of messing up his training and so on (apart from anything else, can anyone explain any possible reason on this Earth that he could lose to James Blake at the Olympics????

You're normally good on detail lydian. ACTIVE player, the question asked ....

I dunno Almagro?

lol...I modified my response lags above...and then went for Lopez or Ferrer...given its a surprising one I'm plumping for Deliciano (to quote Judy).

I too now have cheated!!

My shout for Almagro, wasn't that bad

lydian wrote:lol...I modified my response lags above...and then went for Lopez or Ferrer...given its a surprising one I'm plumping for Deliciano (to quote Judy).

You're getting cold again

Maybe it was one of what you first thought

ok lydian .... our last posts crossed .... and I see you've now named a couple of active players.

Step forward Feliciano Lopez.

He began a run of consecutive Slam appearances beginning with RG in 2002 and which now stands at 45, following his appearance (and exit) at this year's RG

I believe David Ferrer is next on 42

As already mentioned, only Ferreira (with 56) is now ahead of Federer (54) amongst ALL players whether active or retired

Well done lydian

bogbrush wrote: He obviously didn't have the latter GF, no question. I believe it impaired him for a period of months, then had the impact of messing up his training and so on (apart from anything else, can anyone explain any possible reason on this Earth that he could lose to James Blake at the Olympics????

Yes it messed up his usual Dubai training in Feb, not much more.
In terms of Blake I just think he played a one-off blinder, when he was "on" he was a very good player...Federer said of the loss "I've played him on many occasions, but I think this was the best I've seen him."
Perhaps it was kind of Federer's Rosol/Soderling moment...they all have them. I still think Nadal would have beaten him anyway at OG...he was almost unplayable for those May-Aug months before USO.

lags72 wrote: Step forward Feliciano Lopez.

Banbrotam...lol

Good poser lags...not that I'm calling you a poser per se of course

Amazing how Lopez has been in and around the top for so long yet not really achieved that much in the game. He is the perfect long-lasting journeyman...and has done amazingly well for having NO backhand. His serve isn't bad though

lydian wrote:

bogbrush wrote: He obviously didn't have the latter GF, no question. I believe it impaired him for a period of months, then had the impact of messing up his training and so on (apart from anything else, can anyone explain any possible reason on this Earth that he could lose to James Blake at the Olympics????

Yes it messed up his usual Dubai training in Feb, not much more.
In terms of Blake I just think he played a one-off blinder, when he was "on" he was a very good player...Federer said of the loss "I've played him on many occasions, but I think this was the best I've seen him."
Perhaps it was kind of Federer's Rosol/Soderling moment...they all have them. I still think Nadal would have beaten him anyway at OG...he was almost unplayable for those May-Aug months before USO.

Blake was one example. That year he was losing to Roddick (!!!!), Fish..... that was even the year when Gilles Simon got his two wins.

I hadn't thought of this until just typing now, but maybe behind everything else Federer's biggest vulnerability is that he can't handle being knocked off his stride. Yesterday he was cruising until he tripped; it was no big deal, but he immediately double faulted, threw away a service game, started shanking everywhere. It was like a light switched off, surely an injury? But no, it wasn't because two sets later he picked himself up. Maybe the biggest problem he had with the mono was that it trashed his carefully prepared routines so badly, shook his confidence and more or less messed him up big time.

Here's the list, that I assume others used

http://www.tennis28.com/slams/cons_appearances.html


Interesting that the former much maligned, fitness issues, Novak Djokovic could break the reocord

I wonder what Socal will have to say

You may have a point BB.
If you remember I've posted a few times about the 3 traits Federer (and leading athletes) has psychologically.
On the old 606 I linked that to why he went without a coach for so long.

Like Nadal, he's a perfectionist but not in a so obviously external way. Like Nadal he has his mental bottles all lined up with the labels pointing forwards. Whenever something happens to knock those "bottles" over the inner calm can go awry and with Federer we know he had early issues with anxiety/panic too.

Unlike Nadal, he also has a narcissistic side and hates having his feathers ruffled (although Nadal doesn't like that either...Rosol shoulder bump for example...but that's may deeply linked to Spanish competitive macho-ism I feel).
All in all I think this is why his 5 set record isn't as good as you might expect of a 17 time slam winner, he doesn't handle disruptions to smooth processions as well as some others. Its a strength and a weakness really...as Nadal's OCD is to him similarly.

Thanks lydian

(don't really mind being referred to as a poser ..... although a French version of 'poseur' tends to sound better .... !! )

I guess it's one thing staying fit & consistent enough to make the main field for one Slam after another over several years (in itself no mean feat) BUT ...... going deep in every event is quite another. I haven't checked just how far Ferreira progressed in each of his 56 record Slam appearances, but something tells me he didn't play anything like the total number of rounds as Fed has done on his (current) tally of 54 .........

lol, most things in French sound better don't they.

Reminds me of that passage from The Matrix, where the Merovingian says:

"I love French wine, like I love the French language. I have sampled every language, French is my favorite. Fantastic language. Especially to curse with.
Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d'enculer ta mère.
It's like wiping your a*se with silk. I love it."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4e1Y-2Rz24

Unlikely that Djokovic will break the record, he is nowhere near it, and bound to miss a slam for one reason or another at some point, plus Federer might get 5 or 10 or 20 further ahead yet.

Good and timely article this, I was just thinking about this yesterday. He has walked a tightrope with these types of matches and never fallen off yet.

Lopez, eh? Actually, it was Ferrer I was thinking of, as when I looked him up over the weekend he had played 40 consecutive GS before this year (so this must be his 42nd) and I just assumed he would be the guy in second place.
I guess Connors holds the total GS record as he was still pitching up deep into his 30s.

lydian - French undoubtedly sounds good.

But I think Italian runs it close.

When Fognini was going through his phase of ranting and raving (but pretty well under control it must be said) both to himself and towards his box during the Nadal match, there was a definite feeling that it was all much more tasteful and even 'classier' than if it would have been in English, or indeed virtually any other language ....

I agree with Italian. That is a beautiful language.

Mais oui Lags....after all those operas sung by Pavarotti wouldn't sound half as good in French or English.

Looks like Kohli is getting pegged back now...

Be surprised if Djoko matches Federer's record - 20 slams gap means 5 more years of avoiding injury and illness from the time that Federer misses a tournament. Still impressive for someone who has a reputation for having had a couple of injuries and withdrawls from tournaments to have a strong of 34 consecutive slams.

Shows even more how remarkable Federer's record of 36 consecutive slam QFs is - only 5 active players are on a streak of appearances that long, and only 14 players have ever played that many consecutive slams. If he can keep it going to the end of the year, it would represent a top 10 performance just for number of slams in a row. It's a record likely to remain for a long time, wherever the streak ends.

As for his match yesterday, I think really there was a combination of Fed's level dropping a bit in the 2nd and 3rd sets and Simon just playing blindingly well for an hour - not surprisingly though, Simon couldn't maintain the pressure and Fed was able to hold a good enough level to come through in the end (of course there were a few magic moments from RF - one forehand winner in the 4th set hit as a little flicked shot from by his ankle from an absolutely massive Simon forehand was particularly memorable).

I may have misunderstood part of your post here dummy_half, (apologies if so) but with regard to the number of consecutive Slams played - ie as opposed to how far he actually progressed in each - then Federer is already way ahead of any active player with his current tally of 54, counting this current RG. In fact, as mentioned earlier in the thread, there is only one player now ahead of him in the Open era and he retired quite some time ago - the former top tenner from South Africa, Wayne Ferreira with 56

Given tennis is a lot more gruelling now (say post 2007/8 ish..) it makes the 54/56....70(?) even harder to match in the future I suspect.

I'm going to say pretty much impossible lydian.

It would mean at least FOURTEEN years on tour without missing a single Slam. Even assuming you were good enough and healthy/fit enough, would you also have the motivation to stick at it for so long .... ?

Indeed, you may have the talent but not the drive, or vice-versa.

Its mind-boggling numbers...14 years...geez.

Unreal

lags

I was trying to emphasise how hard Roger's streak of 36 quarter finals will be for anyone to match, by highlighting that only 14 players have ever even played that many slams in a row, regardless of results. A couple more QFs (and given these will be Wimby and USO, that's more likely than not) and Fed's QF streak would be as long as the top 10 appearance streak (and RF will himself be equalling Fereiro's 56 consecutive GSs).

Oh right, I see the point. Understood.

Btw, ref that 'flick' shot you mentioned from yesterday's match ....... it sure was something special. The expression on Simon's face could be translated as "that didn't actually happen, because it's just not possible to do that ..... "

lags72 wrote:Oh right, I see the point. Understood.

Btw, ref that 'flick' shot you mentioned from yesterday's match ....... it sure was something special. The expression on Simon's face could be translated as "that didn't actually happen, because it's just not possible to do that ..... "

I was bemused that the shot at 2-2, 30-30 in the 4th set, Federer serving, when he did a half volley flick down the line, didn't make any highlights reel. Had that gone wide or net it was break point, and maybe that would have been that. Huge.

I think it was Courier who picked it straight away.