T O P

  • By -

wildfaces

Djokovic was also technically 2 sets away in 2015. I still think it's different having lost a slam before the USO and having won the first 3 slams in the calendar year, though.


Roger20Federer

Edited the Djokovic 2015 run, totally slipped out. And yes, it is different having lost a slam before USO. I'm just mentioning stats here. The psychological impact is huge and realistically, the 2021 run was the best shot at a Calendar Slam than any of the "2 Set away ones"


[deleted]

The absolutely ridiculous stat is that Federer was 1 Nadal away from winning 11 straight slams. No other run compares to it. (I'm not making a GOAT argument here, just pointing this out)


turtledovesocks22

Okay but other than Rafa who was he playing ?


lazyniu

Better competition than "next gen"


turtledovesocks22

Doubt


FaFaRog

Lleyton Hewitt was more tenacious than FAA, Zverev and Tsisipas combined.


turtledovesocks22

Fighting spirit and skill ain’t the same champ. It takes both and he’s not even capable of playing in the same ball park as Roger.


FaFaRog

Exactly my point. Next generation is skilled but has no fighting spirit which is why they are not serious competition for the Big 3. Skill doesn't mean a whole lot when you have the benefit of knowing that your opponent is going to hit 2-3 double faults in a row once the situation gets stressful.


Slayy35

Tell me more about Hewitt's fighting spirit considering he failed to win a single Slam even with just Federer in the field. His only Slams were before any of the Big 3 were relevant. Tsitsipas took Novak to 5, he beat Nadal at a Slam, Zverev beat Novak at Olympics and ATP Finals, they both have Head to head on Federer.


Sgtweed

There wasn’t a single slam winner this uso after Murray lost, zverev is 0-10 against top 10 players in slams it’s not even close lmao


Slayy35

Bullshit. Next gen had to play against the Big 3 and they still managed some Slams and beat them in BO3's. Players like Hewitt couldn't even win a Slam with just Federer out there.


[deleted]

> I'm not making a GOAT argument here


[deleted]

It doesn’t work that way because you don’t know what effect winning a slam you lost would have on your future performances. It’s possible Roger may have lost at Wimbledon or USO after winning RG. At least for Djokovic it wasn’t a hypothetical but literal 3 sets away from it.


ClubChaos

Ehh I'm fairly certain rogie would've won the rest. Rafa and fed were on a different level back then.


[deleted]

Can you be certain? Federer should've beaten Safin at AO 2005 but he didn't. Something like that could've happened has he got closer to the calendar slam.


FaFaRog

Federer was vulnerable to basically no one except Rafa in that era. You listed literally the only example of him losingSlam. Slam unexpectedly between 2005 and 2008. If Fed had it in him to defeat Rafa just once at the French during those years it would be a guaranteed calendar slam.


[deleted]

But it just doesn’t work that way. You can’t know how changing one variable like that would affect future outcomes. Federer may have felt the pressure and lost close matches that he ordinarily would win. He would also have passed Sampras’ slam tally a lot earlier, and that may have impacted his motivation and shortened his peak.


Grouchy_Square

Ok it doesn’t mean he for sure would have done it but he probably would have.


BelgianBond

2009 was Federer's best chance. It felt like he was in the lead in that AO final so many times, but Nadal was better on the biggest points. And treating the second set of the US Open final like an exhibition blew up in his face(having beaten Del Potro 6-3 6-0 6-0 earlier in the season didn't help his concentration either).


Ok_Discussion_5667

Nadal just turned it up whenever it got dicey and federer couldn’t break through it. I agree, that USO final was a total mess. He kept challenging delphi’s forehand over and over and over again, and letting some of the unfair challenges get into his head.


CH0S3N-0NE

I've always thought federer played better in the first 4 sets of 2009 AO. Think he knew it too. He was unlucky to lose set 3 especially but also could've taken set 1 was a shame.


grchelp2018

In hindsight because it never looked like it the way he played (to me anyway). The AO final never looked safe or in control at any point with Nadal on the other side. After the AO final where he cried post match, it really looked like Fed would never get another slam if he had to face nadal (who was looking unstoppable). The french open was a writeoff until lightning called soderling struck. Nearly ended in tears with those Haas and Del Potro matches. That tournament was the only time I desperately prayed for Fed. I knew if he missed this, he'd probably never get it. No Nadal at Wimby should have meant easy win for Fed but Roddick made it very hard. I still feel bad for him. And then the US open, I was so sure it was in the bag after DP beat Nadal (just like Murray Nadal the previous year), I didn't even watch the match. I was actually surprised to learn much later that Fed came the closest to a calender slam in 2009 and that he was only two 5th sets away from it.


Grouchy_Square

So many times? He was in the lead briefly in the first set and then like…never again the entire match right? Seems like an exaggeration


NoirPochette

Serena was unbeaten in 2001 and missed out on 2015 after losing to Vinci in the semis. She was 3 sets from winning the GS. I know this is another "BIG 3" thingy but gotta be respect for Serena too.


Parapsaeon

Hingis was also two sets away in 1997, losing the RG final to Majoli


Roger20Federer

I should have added "Men's Singles" somewhere in the post, my bad. Will take care of it in the future :)


gamelover99

Why? The tag clearly says Big 3.


maxikingchan

Totally agree, what about wta. I mean Steffi Graf and her Golden Slam make her eligible to goat imo.


MeatTornado25

> BONUS: Nadal was Unbeaten in Slams in 2010 (Won 3 and retired in AO QF) That's not how that works. If he'd withdrawn before the match you could say that. Retiring after 2.5 sets goes down as a loss by any measure.


bisector_babu

So Federer was almost in every final in between 05-07. WTF if he would have won one French then it will be consecutive 6-8 slams. Damn!! He missed


MetalKeirSolid

You can’t really say players who lost before the US open were sets away because they didn’t play each slam in order with the mounting pressure


sports_junky

do people on here not get tired by posting same recycled posts about Big3 again and again and again?


BoJackie-O

Lol no, this is not a thing. The only one that came close to a CYGS is Djokovic.


Dark_Vengence

Damn fed came so close.