The v2 Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

4 posters

Go down

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year.... Empty Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

Post by eraldeen Tue 29 Nov 2011, 1:00 pm

Federer has been the only player able to win multiple slams after a 3 slam year(from 2004 to 2005, from 2006 to 2007), so that is an exception and not the norm...



Last edited by eraldeen on Tue 29 Nov 2011, 4:24 pm; edited 1 time in total

eraldeen

Posts : 155
Join date : 2011-09-21

Back to top Go down

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year.... Empty Re: Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

Post by eraldeen Tue 29 Nov 2011, 4:23 pm

If I were a betting man, I would say Novak is most likely to win just 1 slam next year.

eraldeen

Posts : 155
Join date : 2011-09-21

Back to top Go down

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year.... Empty Re: Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

Post by lydian Tue 29 Nov 2011, 4:32 pm

Some may point to the competitiveness of the eras...!

Some may also point to Laver winning the Grand Slam in 62, then was excluded until the open era and in the next full year (Open era only started part way through 1968, not the start of it) he won the grand slam again. I have a feeling Nadal would have likely won 3 in 2009 (AO/FO/SW19 - although to be fair Soderling played the match of his life too...who knows) had he not been injured from Miami onwards but that's pure conjecture of course.

Otherwise, yep Federer is the man! Not sure about Novak, depends on his injuries and how the others respond too.
lydian
lydian

Posts : 9178
Join date : 2011-04-30

Back to top Go down

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year.... Empty Re: Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

Post by laverfan Tue 29 Nov 2011, 4:56 pm

Connors missed a potential GS, due to his legal fights and association with WTT. Sad

http://espn.go.com/sportscentury/features/00014143.html

lydian wrote: then was excluded until the open era and in the next full year

Laver won 8/15 Pro championships during the 62-68 Open Era hiatus, which should be valued as well. Wink

laverfan
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 11252
Join date : 2011-04-07
Location : NoVA, USoA

Back to top Go down

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year.... Empty Re: Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

Post by yummymummy Tue 29 Nov 2011, 5:28 pm

Ooo My crystal ball seems to have broken Sad

yummymummy

Posts : 1361
Join date : 2011-02-27
Location : NW Scotland

Back to top Go down

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year.... Empty Re: Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

Post by lydian Tue 29 Nov 2011, 5:33 pm

Good point LF...most pundits feel that Laver would have won above 20 slams had he not being excluded from the tour between 62-68 - do you know what his H2H vs Emerson was given that Emerson was the king of the amateur period?
lydian
lydian

Posts : 9178
Join date : 2011-04-30

Back to top Go down

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year.... Empty Re: Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

Post by laverfan Tue 29 Nov 2011, 5:48 pm

lydian wrote:Good point LF...most pundits feel that Laver would have won above 20 slams had he not being excluded from the tour between 62-68 - do you know what his H2H vs Emerson was given that Emerson was the king of the amateur period?

Laver Emerson - 49-18 overall.

Before Open Era - 20-12.

Open Era - 29-6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laver-Emerson_rivalry

laverfan
Moderator
Moderator

Posts : 11252
Join date : 2011-04-07
Location : NoVA, USoA

Back to top Go down

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year.... Empty Re: Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

Post by lydian Tue 29 Nov 2011, 6:18 pm

Thanks LF - well I think that shows he would have won the majority of titles in that amateur period when Emerson amassed 12 slams - given Laver won 11 himself outside that period that clearly would put him beyond 20...probably a record that would never have been beaten.
lydian
lydian

Posts : 9178
Join date : 2011-04-30

Back to top Go down

Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year.... Empty Re: Connors, Wilander and Nadal couldn't win multiple slams the following year after their 3 slam year....

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum