33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"? - Page 4 - MensTennisForums.com
View Poll Results: Does Murray have the right to be referred to as being part of a "big four"?
Yes 46 51.11%
Nope 30 33.33%
No, he needs X (arbitary) number of slams to be there 14 15.56%
Voters: 90. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #46 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 05:03 PM
Registered User
 
GSMnadal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Netherlands
Age: 23
Posts: 16,533
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathaliia View Post
he's pretty much spanking everyone else in the important matches and has a very competitive h2h against fed/rafa/nole as it was mentioned

these 4 guys are so often in slam semis while other put all their powers to fluke one semi in 2 years or so.

i dont know what more you need, it is clear at this moment there's nobody else able to reach them and snatch these wigs

he is visibly better than the ones below him, the big four is not about naming 4 players with biggest accomplishments of tennis history
In what universe is getting pimpslapped 13-5 a competitive h2h

RAFAEL NADAL

'Rafael Nadal is the best ever' - John McEnroe

1 AO - 9 RG - 2 W - 2 USO
GSMnadal is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #47 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 05:06 PM
Registered User
 
janko05's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,280
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by arm View Post
If you're going to go that way, then 28 slams combined vs 5... does Nole deserve to be in the big 3?
Agree, but what bothers me the most is who should be considered member of the big 3 instead?

Quote:
Originally Posted by: Toni Nadal
Rafael has won more titles than Novak Djokovic, but speaking merely about tennis and about the game, Rafa has to be considered slightly lower than Djokovic. The Serb is such a good player that he is as close as you can get to Roger Federer
janko05 is offline  
post #48 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 05:06 PM
Registered User
 
GSMnadal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Netherlands
Age: 23
Posts: 16,533
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janko05 View Post
Agree, but what bothers me the most is who should be considered member of the big 3 instead?
This Isner guy is pretty big

RAFAEL NADAL

'Rafael Nadal is the best ever' - John McEnroe

1 AO - 9 RG - 2 W - 2 USO
GSMnadal is offline  
post #49 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 05:11 PM
Registered User
 
Sophocles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Age: 41
Posts: 8,986
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GSMnadal View Post
In what universe is getting pimpslapped 13-5 a competitive h2h
Against Nadal, whose total domination of clay gives him commanding H2H leads against nearly everybody, a 5-13 H2H including 5-6 on hard courts & 2 victories in slams is competitive.

"There is no such thing as 'the world'." - Enoch Powell.
Sophocles is offline  
post #50 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 05:22 PM
Registered User
 
saviopr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 270
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Of course yes. 1 USO and 4 more GS finals (3 of them last 3 years) are enough.
saviopr is offline  
post #51 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 05:34 PM
#1
 
ProdigyEng's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Age: 23
Posts: 32,661
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GSMnadal View Post
0% chance against Nadal on clay.
0% chance against Nadal on grass.
not even 50% chance on his beloved hardcourts against Rafa.

True legend of the game this Murray. He has had one fantastic tournament that actually matterd, London 2012. Otherwise he's been mediocre.
I'm starting to think you're a closet Murray fan, all you do is post in threads about him, or mention his name in threads that have nothing to do with him...

Mark Lenders banged your girlfriend, I'm sorry to tell you that mate.
ProdigyEng is offline  
post #52 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 05:39 PM
Registered User
 
Saberq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,983
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sophocles View Post
Against Nadal, whose total domination of clay gives him commanding H2H leads against nearly everybody, a 5-13 H2H including 5-6 on hard courts & 2 victories in slams is competitive.
clay is a surface you know same as grass and hard....just because Nadal kicks ass on it doesnt mean it is less important
Saberq is offline  
post #53 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 05:53 PM
Registered User
 
TigerTim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Bristol, England
Posts: 13,402
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Murray is 6"3 so is the biggest of the four.

On Murray

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamvol View Post
He probably just hangs about in 2nd place protecting himself with 3 bananas whilst waiting for the person in the lead to get blue shelled.
Nadal 2015

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadmap View Post
Nadull was not injured. The reason he was moving like shit near the end of the third set is because of the depression of knowing your opponent is superior in all departments.

TigerTim is offline  
post #54 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 06:09 PM
country flag arm
Registered User
 
arm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 27,929
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janko05 View Post
Agree, but what bothers me the most is who should be considered member of the big 3 instead?
There wouldn't be a big 3 if you were to consider the number of slams only.

Hewitt has 2 slams, maybe he should be considered in this equation, no?

This whole thread is pointless. You consider "the big 4", 3, 5 or whatever, the players whose achievements and consistency creates a gap between them and the rest of the field. And given this definition, and since we should probably talk about the PRESENT, Murray damn well deserves the right to be considered part of "the big 4". Right now, he deserves it more than Nadal even.
arm is offline  
post #55 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 06:15 PM
Registered User
 
MurrayMagic1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Age: 25
Posts: 360
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

He has been a part of the big four for quite some time now. It is right for Muzz to be part of the big four He has won a GS he has beaten Fed , Nadal and Nole more times than any other active player on the tour plus he is consistent. He has also won quite a lot of titles. It would be wrong for Andy to be placed in the group below the number 4 ranking. because he is simply too good for them he is a class ahead of them.

Andy Murray ---- 2 time grand slam champion. Your argument is invalid.
MurrayMagic1 is offline  
post #56 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 06:46 PM
Registered User
 
JanKowalski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Poland
Age: 34
Posts: 1,933
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caesar1844 View Post
It's not about Slam titles, it's about competitiveness.

For a long time those four players have been well above the rest of the pack. I mean, there are pretty much 4 'big' tournament types in tennis that (if fit) all the top players will be there and want to win - Slams, Masters, YECs and Olympics. If you visually represent how many of those each player has won in the last 4 years you get this:

15 - Nadal
14 - Djokovic




8 - Murray

6 - Federer



2 - Davydenko
1 - Soderling, Ferrer, Del Potro, Lubijic


i.e. the big 4 have won 43 of the 49 blue ribbon events in tennis in that period. Murray has won 8 of those. Yeah there is only one Slam in there, but it is still more than double what the rest of the tour has been able to take off the top 3. That means he is the only one consistently able to play with the big boys. He is further above the rest of the tour than the other 3 are above him.

So yeah, although he is the runt of the group, Muzz is definitely part of the big four dominating the tour. Has been for a long time. The rest of the tour are playing for scraps.
More like:

15 - Nadal
14 - Djokovic
13 - Federer




8 - Murray

Jesus, those kids today. Can't even do the simplest maths.
JanKowalski is offline  
post #57 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 06:53 PM
Registered User
 
Mark Lenders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 16,639
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Overall, no.

But right now he's unquestionably the third best player in the world (with Nadal out) - closer to the second than to the fourth - , so if this 'Big 4' refers to the four best players at the moment, then yes.

MTF games titles:

Suicide Tennis (5): Wimbledon 2014, World Tour Finals 2015, Madrid 2015, Kuala Lumpur 2014 and Metz 2015 - 1 Slam, 1 WTF, 1 Masters 1000, 2 ATP 250; 2 finals lost

Fill-in-the-Draw (3): US Open 2014, Rotterdam 2013 and Geneva 2015 - 1 Slam, 1 ATP 500 and 1 ATP 250

Tennis Tipping (3): Veneza and Todi 2014 (with vn01), Knoxville 2015 (with Redkop) - 3 challengers; 7 finals lost
Mark Lenders is offline  
post #58 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 06:57 PM
Registered User
 
BackhandDTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Age: 24
Posts: 5,084
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janko05 View Post
Agree, but what bothers me the most is who should be considered member of the big 3 instead?
Right, because the gods of tennis demand the very existence of a "big 3", without whom, the tour would cease to exist as we know it!

It's simple: if 28 v. 5 doesn't hold up, then we're still left with "Fedal" as a big 2.


Of course, that, like this thread in general, ignores the fact that Djokovic and Murray are both only entering the prime stages of their careers. They each have plenty of time to add more accomplishments to their resumes, and yet they're being compared with two guys who have done so for years.

This thread reminds me of those old fanatical "weak competition" arguments, wherein a decade's worth of numbers were being put up against those of an in-progress generation.

The fact is that Murray contributes to the stranglehold that the top four have on men's tennis. He's part of that ironclad barrier keeping other guys from winning events.
BackhandDTL is offline  
post #59 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 07:12 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Age: 62
Posts: 206
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by End da Game View Post
yeah, but personally I think delpo is the more legit 4th member of this 'big four' club
You jest, seriously I quite like Potty, but seriously, no masters, not one..!!!!
Gullyfoyle is offline  
post #60 of 113 (permalink) Old 01-16-2013, 07:15 PM
Registered User
 
GSMnadal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Netherlands
Age: 23
Posts: 16,533
                     
Re: 33 combined slams vs 1 - does Murray have the right to be in a "big four"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sophocles View Post
Against Nadal, whose total domination of clay gives him commanding H2H leads against nearly everybody, a 5-13 H2H including 5-6 on hard courts & 2 victories in slams is competitive.
Yeah, those 4 clay matches out of 18 really skewed it in his favour.

RAFAEL NADAL

'Rafael Nadal is the best ever' - John McEnroe

1 AO - 9 RG - 2 W - 2 USO
GSMnadal is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome