The Federer era - a tribute

It’s official now: Rafael Nadal will supplant Roger Federer as the #1 men’s tennis player in the world. In two week, the rankings will show Nadal in the #1 position, thanks to Federer’s recent failures to match last season’s performances. Nadal certainly deserves it - now we wait to see how long he can hold on.

Federer’s reign as #1 may be over for now, but his period of dominance will not be forgotten. First off, he spent 235 consecutive weeks at #1. Before that, the record was 160 by Jimmy Connors; Federer surpassed that by almost a year and a half. The great Pete Sampras’s longest reign was 102 weeks. Here’s something even more incredible: Nadal has been #2 for 158 weeks, almost as long as anyone other than Federer was #1!. That means that for three years Nadal has been there, but he couldn’t get past Federer. Translation: Federer was consistently better than Nadal over that time.

Next, let’s compare Federer’s period of dominance with Sampras’s most impressive span of dominance. I’ve looked at the best five year performances for them. I’m including 2003 for Federer rather than 2008, since his winning percentage was better that year. For Sampras, I’m looking at ten years before Federer: 1993-1997. I’m going to look at their performances each year, then the cumulative totals. Specific title wins will be listed for Grand Slams, Masters series events, and the Tennis Masters Cup.

2003 Federer: 78-17 record, 23 tournaments, 9 finals, 7 titles. Won Wimbledon and Masters Cup.

1993 Sampras: 85-16 record, 24 tournaments, 9 finals, 8 titles. Won Wimbledon, U.S. Open, and Miami Masters.

2004 Federer: 74-6 record, 17 tournaments, 11 finals, 11 titles. Won Australian Open, Wimbledon, U.S. Open, Masters Cup, Indian Wells Masters, Hamburg Masters, and Canada Masters.

1994 Sampras: 77-12 record, 22 tournaments, 12 finals, 10 titles. Won Australian Open, Wimbledon, Masters Cup, Indian Wells Masters, Miami Masters, and Rome Masters.

2005 Federer: 81-4 record, 15 tournaments, 12 finals, 11 titles. Won Wimbledon, U.S. Open, Indian Wells Masters, Miami Masters, Hamburg Masters, and Cincinnati Masters.

1995 Sampras: 72-16 record, 21 tournaments, 9 finals, 5 titles. Won Wimbledon, U.S. Open, Indian Wells Masters, and Paris Masters.

2006 Federer: 92-5 record, 17 tournaments, 16 finals, 12 titles. Won Australian Open, Wimbledon, U.S. Open, Masters Cup, Indian Wells Masters, Miami Masters, Canada Masters, and Madrid Masters.

1996 Sampras: 65-11 record, 19 tournaments, 9 finals, 8 titles. Won U.S. Open and Masters Cup.

2007 Federer: 68-9 record, 16 tournaments, 12 finals, 8 titles. Won Australian Open, Wimbledon, U.S. Open, Masters Cup, Hamburg Masters, and Cincinnati Masters.

1997 Sampras: 55-12 record, 20 tournaments, 8 finals, 8 titles. Won Australian Open, Wimbledon, Masters Cup, Cincinnati Masters, and Paris Masters.

All right, let’s tally up the totals for those five-year spans:

Sampras: 354-67 record, 106 tournaments*, 47 finals, 39 titles. Won 9 Grand Slams, 3 Masters Cups, and 8 Masters Series events. (*- I’m not entirely sure about the total tournaments played since Wikipedia doesn’t say for him. I added his titles to his losses to come up with this number, but that’s assuming he went 3-0 in round robin play at the Masters Cup. Sampras very well may have lost one match in round robin play in some years. This total, though, is no more than five off.)

Federer: 393-41 record, 88 tournaments, 60 finals, 49 titles. Won 12 Grand Slams, 4 Masters Cups, and 13 Masters Series events.

That is flat out stunning: Federer rules every category of that comparison. He won more Grand Slams, Masters Series events, Masters Cups, and overall titles than Sampras. (In case you were wondering, the five year span I selected for Sampras was his career best by far. He won 39 tournaments in that period and only 25 for the entire rest of his career.) Federer’s overall record was tremendously more dominant than Sampras’s. Consider just these two facts:

1. In his entire career, Sampras won 10 tournaments in a season only once (1994). Federer did it in three consecutive seasons (2004-2006).
2. In a full season (at least 15 tournaments played), Sampras never had fewer than 10 losses in a season. Federer accomplished that four seasons in a row (2004-2007).

Here are a few more of Federer’s amazing records:

• Grass court winning streak: 65 matches from 2003 to 2008. Second best: Bjorn Borg 41.
• Hardcourt winning streak: 56 matches from 2005 to 2006.
• Consecutive finals won: 24 from 2003 to 2005. Second best: John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg 12.
• He is the only player to win at least three times in three separate Grand Slam tournaments (3 Australian Open, 5 Wimbledon, 4 U.S. Open).
• He is the only player to win three Grand Slam tournaments in a single season three times in his career (Australian Open, Wimbledon, U.S. Open in 2004, 2006, 2007).
• He has the record for consecutive Grand Slam finals reached: 10, from the 2005 Wimbledon to the 2007 U.S. Open.
• He has a current streak of 17 consecutive semifinals reached in Grand Slam tournaments. Second best: Ivan Lendl 8. (By comparison, Rafael Nadal’s best streak, albeit current, is 3.)
• Highest rankings point total ever: 8370 at the end of the 2006 season.
• From October 2003 to January 2005, Federer won a record 26 consecutive matches against top 10 opponents.

I think this final stat tells Federer’s dominance story the best. In Borg’s streak of five straight Wimbledon titles, he lost a total of 19 sets. In Sampras’s streak of four straight, he lost 14 sets. In Federer’s five-year streak, he lost only 8!

Nadal may be #1, but he has a long way to go to ever be considered along with Federer as the greatest of all time.