Most match wins at AO

[GameSetAndMath]

As nobody bothered to mention it, let me do.

By winning the second round match two days ago, Fed became the player with most
AO wins.

For ease of reference, here are the leaders in all the four grand slams.

Tournament Player W-L
Australian Open Roger Federer 70-10
Roland Garros Rafael Nadal 59-1
Wimbledon Jimmy Connors 84-18
US Open Jimmy Connors 98-17

Can you believe that Fed has more match wins at AO than in Wimbledon or USO?
But, it is true.

Read full article below.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2014/01/3/Australian-Open-2014-Day-4-Federer.aspx

 

[Mastoor]

I wonder if No1e's 25 consecutive wins at AO is a record too.

 

[rafanoy1992]

As nobody bothered to mention it, let me do.

By winning the second round match two days ago, Fed became the player with most
AO wins.

For ease of reference, here are the leaders in all the four grand slams.

Tournament Player W-L
Australian Open Roger Federer 70-10
Roland Garros Rafael Nadal 59-1
Wimbledon Jimmy Connors 84-18
US Open Jimmy Connors 98-17

Can you believe that Fed has more match wins at AO than in Wimbledon or USO?
But, it is true.

Read full article below.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2014/01/3/Australian-Open-2014-Day-4-Federer.aspx

In a sense, it is not surprising. This is Federer's 15th Australian Open so there is a great chance of playing a lot of matches

But the number one reason on why he has more wins in AO than Wimbledon and USO is because Federer has reached the Australian Open semifinals in 10 straight years dating back in 2004. That's just an amazing feat right there.

 

[Tennis Miller]

As nobody bothered to mention it, let me do.

By winning the second round match two days ago, Fed became the player with most
AO wins.

For ease of reference, here are the leaders in all the four grand slams.

Tournament Player W-L
Australian Open Roger Federer 70-10
Roland Garros Rafael Nadal 59-1
Wimbledon Jimmy Connors 84-18
US Open Jimmy Connors 98-17

Can you believe that Fed has more match wins at AO than in Wimbledon or USO?
But, it is true.

Read full article below.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2014/01/3/Australian-Open-2014-Day-4-Federer.aspx

In a sense, it is not surprising. This is Federer's 15th Australian Open so there is a great chance of playing a lot of matches

But the number one reason on why he has more wins in AO than Wimbledon and USO is because Federer has reached the Australian Open semifinals in 10 straight years dating back in 2004. That's just an amazing feat right there.

Even that streak is in serious jeopardy this year for 32-year old Roger. He'll need to beat Tsonga and then Murray just to get to a semi with... Rafa.

Cheers
TM

 

[DarthFed]

I was initially surprised Roger didn't have the most wins at Wimbledon and USO but then I remembered that Connors played 200 years and basically put those out of reach.

 

[Denis]

I wonder if No1e's 25 consecutive wins at AO is a record too.

Hey Mastoor, good to see you! It is. At least in the Open Era. :clap

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I was initially surprised Roger didn't have the most wins at Wimbledon and USO but then I remembered that Connors played 200 years and basically put those out of reach.

What I mentioned has nothing to do with Connors playing 200 years. The fact
is Roger has more match wins in AO than in Wimbledon or USO. Here, I am only
talking about Roger's number of matches won in different slams.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

and he is equal 3rd on wins in open era with vilas..929.

 

[DarthFed]

I was initially surprised Roger didn't have the most wins at Wimbledon and USO but then I remembered that Connors played 200 years and basically put those out of reach.

What I mentioned has nothing to do with Connors playing 200 years. The fact
is Roger has more match wins in AO than in Wimbledon or USO. Here, I am only
talking about Roger's number of matches won in different slams.

I think I'm allowed to talk about the leader board of the slams, or do I need your permission? As for your point it is surprising until you realize that he has made 10 straight semis at AO while he lost very early at Wimbledon last year and in the 1st round in 2002. I am surprised he didn't have more than 70 wins at USO.

 

[Fiero425]

I was initially surprised Roger didn't have the most wins at Wimbledon and USO but then I remembered that Connors played 200 years and basically put those out of reach.

What I mentioned has nothing to do with Connors playing 200 years. The fact
is Roger has more match wins in AO than in Wimbledon or USO. Here, I am only
talking about Roger's number of matches won in different slams.

I think I'm allowed to talk about the leader board of the slams, or do I need your permission? As for your point it is surprising until you realize that he has made 10 straight semis at AO while he lost very early at Wimbledon last year and in the 1st round in 2002. I am surprised he didn't have more than 70 wins at USO.

Even though Federer has twice the majors of Connors, longevity is still on Connors' side and no one can take that away from him! :nono There are some records of his, just like with Navratilova that will never be surpassed just because they played for well over 20 years, almost never missing major events; esp. Wimbledon & USO! :clap

 

[DarthFed]

I was initially surprised Roger didn't have the most wins at Wimbledon and USO but then I remembered that Connors played 200 years and basically put those out of reach.

What I mentioned has nothing to do with Connors playing 200 years. The fact
is Roger has more match wins in AO than in Wimbledon or USO. Here, I am only
talking about Roger's number of matches won in different slams.

I think I'm allowed to talk about the leader board of the slams, or do I need your permission? As for your point it is surprising until you realize that he has made 10 straight semis at AO while he lost very early at Wimbledon last year and in the 1st round in 2002. I am surprised he didn't have more than 70 wins at USO.

Even though Federer has twice the majors of Connors, longevity is still on Connors' side and no one can take that away from him! :nono There are some records of his, just like with Navratilova that will never be surpassed just because they pleyed for well over 20 years almost never missing major events; esp. Wimbledon & USO! :clap

98 wins at USO is just absurd. That's the number of wins someone would have if they played "only" 14 US Opens and just happened to win every single one of them. That is incredibly impressive.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Actually Roger has 67 wins in both Wimbledon and USO. Most probably, he will reach the
70's club in those two also this year.

To be fair, he reached it at AO first as this is the first slam of the year.

At the beginning of 2014, Roger had 68 wins in AO which is just one more than
his # of wins at Wimbledon or USO. He has 58 in FO.

 

[DarthFed]

Hopefully! Sadly Roger winning at least 3 matches at a slam is not a guarantee anymore. I think Roger has received 2 walk overs at Wimbledon and USO that took 2 more wins off the books there.

 

[tented]

Hopefully! Sadly Roger winning at least 3 matches at a slam is not a guarantee anymore. I think Roger has received 2 walk overs at Wimbledon and USO that took 2 more wins off the books there.

You got me curious, so I looked into it.

Roger's walkovers at Majors:

2004 USO R16 - Andrei Pavel

2007 Wimbledon R16 - Tommy Haas

2012 AO R64 - Andreas Beck

2012 USO - R16 - Mardy Fish

 

[DarthFed]

So it was only one at Wimbledon, and he also had one at AO. I thought he had a walkover from Haas at USO or RG too but I guess not.