Is there really a Top 4? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Is there really a Top 4?

BackhandMissile
01-29-2012, 06:55 AM
There's a lot of hype about Murray at the moment for keeping up with Djokovic for 5 sets (you know something isn't right when you get credit for not losing badly)

Commentators, especially British ones, love talking about this amazing "top 4" that we're so privileged to witness live on television. Is there really a top 4 though? Del Potro, unlike Murray, actually has a slam and took down Nadal and Federer consecutively to earn it. Murray gets hyped at every slam ("this is the one") and ends up getting schooled (with his latest defeat being an exception).

I give him credit for giving the top 3 a run, and for taking them on outside of slams, but you can't really talk about a top 4 when 3 of the guys have one multiple slams on multiple surfaces and one of them is still on 0.

shiaben
01-29-2012, 07:03 AM
Murray has been consistently to the SFs recently. So he's playing a bit better than Potro or Tsonga. However, he's not in the same level or category as the top 3. He'll need to win multiple slams.

Clydey
01-29-2012, 07:03 AM
There's a lot of hype about Murray at the moment for keeping up with Djokovic for 5 sets (you know something isn't right when you get credit for not losing badly)

Commentators, especially British ones, love talking about this amazing "top 4" that we're so privileged to witness live on television. Is there really a top 4 though? Del Potro, unlike Murray, actually has a slam and took down Nadal and Federer consecutively to earn it. Murray gets hyped at every slam ("this is the one") and ends up getting schooled (with his latest defeat being an exception).

I give him credit for giving the top 3 a run, and for taking them on outside of slams, but you can't really talk about a top 4 when 3 of the guys have one multiple slams on multiple surfaces and one of them is still on 0.

Holding a major is absurdly overrated. Shall I list some of the 'legends' of the game who have also won a major?

Del Potro beat an injured Nadal in the semis. And who the hell knows what happened to Federer in that final? The stars aligned for him that fortnight. Hell, he hasn't even won an MS title. I think that fact is pretty telling.

The reason why Murray gets hyped is because he has the game and all the physical tools to be a multiple slam winner. However, he always lets himself down mentally. Adjusting one's mentality is more feasible than trying to overhaul one's game. That is why people hold out hope.

GSMnadal
01-29-2012, 07:05 AM
When you compare their achievements? Hell no.

Level of play right now? Yes, Murray is better than Federer, he actually was last year already, but he got injured at the end of the season.

tennis2tennis
01-29-2012, 07:07 AM
murray is consistently in the Semi-finals the fact that he doesn't go one or two steps further regularly means he's not a top 2 player...but a top 4 he is!

MaxPower
01-29-2012, 07:08 AM
Nah probably not. If Djokovic wins today there is only

the big top 1

2 declined Fedals

Slamless Scotsman

rest of the mugs

syc23
01-29-2012, 07:15 AM
Nah probably not. If Djokovic wins today there is only

the big top 1

2 declined Fedals

Slamless Scotsman

rest of the mugs

You're an idiot. Go and become a professional tennis player and get to the top 10 before posting drivel.

You think you can do better? I think not.

MuzzahLovah
01-29-2012, 07:20 AM
Silly. Look at all the titles won last year. 9 masters were won by 4 people. That's it. No others. The last two majors had the same 4 people in the semis. Murray didn't win any majors, neither did Fed. They are still ranked in the top 4 and are still leaps and bounds more ahead of the other top 10ers.

MaxPower
01-29-2012, 07:26 AM
You're an idiot. Go and become a professional tennis player and get to the top 10 before posting drivel.

You think you can do better? I think not.

ohhh someone tense for the final? It was a joke. chill out :rolleyes:

philosophicalarf
01-29-2012, 07:35 AM
Top2 now. Things are split into three tiers of 2 for me:

1) The slam winners, Nadal and Djoko. Not a great deal between them, but the matchup is brutal when they meet.

2) The almosts, Murray and Federer. Generally slam semi-finalists nowadays. Many wins against top2, but generally not in slams because of the fitness advantage.

3) Big weapons guys, can beat the best on occasion: Tsonga and Berdy. Ferrer prolly can't be put up here because he never beats the top guys, except when they're unfit.

Dmitry Verdasco
01-29-2012, 07:40 AM
Djokovic/Nadal/Federer

Murray

Del Potro/Soderling/Ferrer/Tsonga/Monfils/Davydenko/Berdych etc.

Clydey
01-29-2012, 07:56 AM
Djokovic/Nadal/Federer

Murray

Del Potro/Soderling/Ferrer/Tsonga/Monfils/Davydenko/Berdych etc.

At this stage, Federer is not a class above Murray. Historically? Obviously he is several levels above. On current form? He's fortunate to be world number 3.

LawrenceOfTennis
01-29-2012, 09:12 AM
Holding a major is absurdly overrated. Shall I list some of the 'legends' of the game who have also won a major?

Del Potro beat an injured Nadal in the semis. And who the hell knows what happened to Federer in that final? The stars aligned for him that fortnight. Hell, he hasn't even won an MS title. I think that fact is pretty telling.

The reason why Murray gets hyped is because he has the game and all the physical tools to be a multiple slam winner. However, he always lets himself down mentally. Adjusting one's mentality is more feasible than trying to overhaul one's game. That is why people hold out hope.

You are mentally handicapped. It's clear by now.
Nadal was not injured. Deal with it.
And Murray has no game to win a slam. Guy has WTA forehand with no depth at all, he will never win a slam. Bitter mug :lol:

LawrenceOfTennis
01-29-2012, 09:13 AM
There is top 3. Never been top 4.

xdrewitdajx
01-29-2012, 09:57 AM
yes, the ATP rankings include a top 4

Vamos_Me_Rafa
01-29-2012, 10:05 AM
Not at all. There's a top 3. Murray can't be taken seriously as a big 4 member when he's the whipping boy of everyone else. It's an absolute embarrassment. He had a chance to prove himself in the SF and folded like a cheap tent. The big 4 is a marketing ploy and the hype for Murray to win a slam is ridiculous but humorous seeing as it will never happen unless he plays Monflea in a Final.

green25814
01-29-2012, 10:17 AM
I think its obvious to most people that Murray is a step above 'the rest' but a step below the 'big three'.

And yes, British commentators are biased/overrate British players shocker

blank_frackis
01-29-2012, 11:59 AM
On form, there really isn't anything between Federer and Murray. Federer last won a slam two years ago (think that falls outside of "recent form"). Since then their performances in slams have been more or less similar (both have one final, Murray has one more semi-final, but Federer has more quarter-finals).

Federer might have been above him for actually challenging the top two in matches (beating Djokovic at the French, pushing him close at the US Open) but it's safe to say Murray challenged Djokovic here, so I don't see any reason to argue for a top 3. At this present moment in time it's either a top 2 or a top 4.

rocketassist
01-29-2012, 01:21 PM
Well Liverpool were part of the Premier League Big 4 despite never winning it, so :lol: