Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sleeping in the house of my latest jumpoff.
The dilemma of being too good for challengers and not good enough at the ATP level.
In baseball in the states, there are certain levels to designate what a player is in their career. You have MLB, then AAA league, AA league, and A league. In the AAA league, it's a mix of young upcoming players and older veterans who have never had a shot, or bounced around the MLB/AAA level and looking for an opportunity. You also have guys who have had a cup of coffee in MLB after doing good in AAA, and failed and been downgraded back to the AAA level, where they usually perform well again. Those guys are considered AAAA players, not good enough for MLB, but too good for AAA.
Tennis is very similar, in that you have the high level ATP's (1000, 500, strong 250s), you have low level ATP's and challengers, and then you have futures. And it's similar in that you have guys who are either working their ways up, or are rediscovering lost form or coming back from injuries. Then you have guys who have made it to the ATP level but failed.
So, my question is, which players in recent memory are the most classic cases of AAAA players, too good for challengers, but not good enough for ATP events consistently?