Is no one else capable of winning and stopping this 4 man race? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Is no one else capable of winning and stopping this 4 man race?

SetSampras
06-01-2011, 09:50 PM
Its been Murray, Djokovic, Nadal and Fed for so long now and we got the same thing here at the french. Obviously these are the 4 best players in the world and have been for a quite long time now..


Is there no one else to finally put an end this 4 man domination show that we have seen for the last 3-4 years. No one else capable of winning outside of these 4?

sexybeast
06-01-2011, 09:51 PM
Del Potro.

alter ego
06-01-2011, 09:52 PM
No this isn't a weak era and Sampras was a clown on clay.

Gagsquet
06-01-2011, 09:52 PM
Gasquet

sexybeast
06-01-2011, 09:53 PM
Gasquet

Only on grass, maybe on other surfaces against Murray.

Ljubo_rulz
06-01-2011, 09:54 PM
What 4 man race? What did Murray do to deserve to be among elite?

Anyway, the answer to your question is Del Potro. I expect he'll be above Muzza before the end of the year. Then we'll have 4 man race.

Time Violation
06-01-2011, 09:57 PM
What 4 man race? What did Murray do to deserve to be among elite?



He has F and SF (with a chance to advance) in two slams this year... I'm not a big fan of the guy, but he deserves it.

Del Potro.

If he's fit, definitely :)

Dougie
06-01-2011, 10:04 PM
Haas will find his rhythm soon.

Voo de Mar
06-01-2011, 10:07 PM
Only Del Potro but he needs to improve his ranking first to avoid encounters with these guys in majors before the last 16. It's impossible to do it before Wimbledon but who knows, maybe during the US Open he will be a Top 8 player :)

sexybeast
06-01-2011, 10:09 PM
Haas will find his rhythm soon.

Maybe, but he will still be 33.

guga2120
06-01-2011, 10:12 PM
JMDP healthy can on hardcourts, obviously. He has shown nothing on clay or grass.

Certinfy
06-01-2011, 10:13 PM
Del Potro.

rocketassist
06-01-2011, 10:13 PM
Del Potro is nothing more than a glorified Gaston Gaudio at this moment in time.

tests
06-01-2011, 10:19 PM
poor set_Sampras... he realizes that this era is going to eventually have multiple guys with multiple slams (fed/nadal/potro/djokervic. and even murray).

And in the future, everyone will be saying how this was a great era... while sampras won in an era of shit competition and a unmotivated agassi.

Sampras still could not reach even ONE french open slam final... not even ONE.

Feds got how many, 8 sfs?

ExcaliburII
06-01-2011, 10:20 PM
Its been Murray, Djokovic, Nadal and Fed for so long now and we got the same thing here at the french. Obviously these are the 4 best players in the world and have been for a quite long time now..


Is there no one else to finally put an end this 4 man domination show that we have seen for the last 3-4 years. No one else capable of winning outside of these 4?

Murray has 0 slams. What are you talking about?

Why So Serious?
06-01-2011, 10:23 PM
Troicki if he finds a brain somehow..

In all seriousness, I only see Pony troubling the big four in the near future.

sexybeast
06-01-2011, 10:25 PM
Poor Murray, finds out he is the 4th wheel in every grand slam where he shows up.

eduggs
06-01-2011, 10:28 PM
Soderling, Berdych, Ferrer, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Simon, Dolgopolov, Belluci, Raonic, and Isner are all capable, IMO, of reaching a GS SF. I also think there are several other youngsters deeper in the top 100, and outside, who will be capable in a year or two.

I foresee a lot more competition at the top in the years to come.

stewietennis
06-01-2011, 10:29 PM
Haas will find his rhythm soon.

This man needs Gil Reyes to get him in optimum condition

ExcaliburII
06-01-2011, 10:30 PM
Del Potro is nothing more than a glorified Gaston Gaudio at this moment in time.

what is Murray then? A glorified Donald Young.

rocketassist
06-01-2011, 10:30 PM
what is Murray then? A glorified Donald Young.

Whoever owned Gaudio in their head to heads.

romismak
06-01-2011, 10:32 PM
They are obviously the best 4 guys out there, but there is one thing that help them a lot. It is their ranking, besides this RG - all 4 made it to SF, last slams were with 3 guys from big 4 in SF - AO - without Rafa in SF, US open without Andy in SF and Wimby without Roger in SF - at least 3 of them were in SF last few slams, they are better than rest of the field, but how i said ranking helped them a lot - they have been top 4 seeded almost every slam in last 3-4 years, actually Soderling was 4th seeded in AO 2011 and Delpo was 4th seeded also AO 2010. But thanks to their ranking that all year are top 4, they donīt play each other in QF, or before that so they are often in SF, others in top 10 are not on their level, maybe Soderling in form is there, but still he is not so consistent all the time at slams and Delpo was out for a year. Actually i can see Wimbledon pretty easy the same SF-ists - i can see Djokovic still be in form, Roger looks here really good so hope in Wimby he will be even better, Murray after great clay season canīt be worse at Wimbledon and if Rafa didnīt loose early rounds to some big server he should be in SF too. But US open definetely i can see Delpo in SF and next year 2011 it wonīt be big 4 but top 5 with Delpo so it will be hard to say which 3or 4 will be in SF. But i am happy with this situation, i think it is much better to have 4 guys dominating the tour last years and winning all the big tournaments then have WTA ... where anyone on good day can surprise anyone.

guga2120
06-01-2011, 10:33 PM
what is Murray then? A glorified Donald Young.

Like a Rios, or Coria, but better than both.

romismak
06-01-2011, 10:36 PM
JMDP healthy can on hardcourts, obviously. He has shown nothing on clay or grass.

Are you serious? i agree with HC, if healthy he will be title contender at every HC slam, HC Master 1000 and WTF, but about clay and grass you are wrong. On grass he can evolve his game, who knows, but on clay he definetely has shown something, besides that he was in SF in 2009, he also took here set from Djokovic - what isnīt so easy this season, and with his huge groundstrokes and that he is from ARG i can see him in future be RG champion.

ExcaliburII
06-01-2011, 10:41 PM
Like a Rios, or Coria, but better than both.

Please dont make me laugh. Murray better than Rios and Coria? :spit:

sexybeast
06-01-2011, 10:43 PM
Dreaming back to the old days, like 16 years ago when Kafalnikov-Sampras and Stich-Rosset played SFs in Roland Garros?

There is a joy with everything unpredictable, that much we can agree on. In the 90s everything seemed possible every single year in Roland Garros, even Kuerten had worse odds to get to SF than Nadal, Federer and Djokovic.

MayerFan
06-01-2011, 10:47 PM
I don't think so. The level of tennis nowadays is pitiful.

sexybeast
06-01-2011, 10:54 PM
Please dont make me laugh. Murray better than Rios and Coria? :spit:

More grand slam finals, semifinals more master series and so on than both of them combined at 24, I dont see that statement that funny really.

romismak
06-01-2011, 10:58 PM
I am now looking on statistics and last slam final, were wasnīt nobody from this Big 4 was AO 2005, and from last 41 Master 1000 tournamets - only in 4 of them wasnīt nobody from this players in final. That is something incredible, i donīt know if it was in history something similar that 4 guys had such record, to be in every slam final and 90% of Master 1000 finals in 3and half year period.

ExcaliburII
06-01-2011, 11:05 PM
More grand slam finals, semifinals more master series and so on than both of them combined at 24, I dont see that statement that funny really.

Rios and Coria played on eras where the players from ranks 5 to 20 where way stronger than they are now, therefore much more difficult to make sf and finals consistently. Its arguable if the top 3 of today is stronger or not than the ones years ago, but the second level players right now are just a disgrace to the sport.

ExcaliburII
06-01-2011, 11:06 PM
I am now looking on statistics and last slam final, were wasnīt nobody from this Big 4 was AO 2005, and from last 41 Master 1000 tournamets - only in 4 of them wasnīt nobody from this players in final. That is something incredible, i donīt know if it was in history something similar that 4 guys had such record, to be in every slam final and 90% of Master 1000 finals in 3and half year period.

Look at the players outside the top 4, there you have the answer.

Verdasco, Melzer, Berdych, etc, etc, etc.

sexybeast
06-01-2011, 11:07 PM
I am now looking on statistics and last slam final, were wasnīt nobody from this Big 4 was AO 2005, and from last 41 Master 1000 tournamets - only in 4 of them wasnīt nobody from this players in final. That is something incredible, i donīt know if it was in history something similar that 4 guys had such record, to be in every slam final and 90% of Master 1000 finals in 3and half year period.


AO 2005 it was actually the old big 4 that all got to SF (Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Safin). Last gathering really before Nadal came in and ruined the party.

MaxPower
06-01-2011, 11:08 PM
I like Murray and all, he seems like a nice fellow but what's with this slotting him with the slam winners and then say "no one else has a chance to win a slam". Murray hasn't won a slam. He's been to 3 finals and never taken a set. Soderling has been to two finals and never taken a set but has defeated both Nadal and Federer in slams. So he obviously can win. He was world nr4 from november 2010 until april 2011 and his best part of the season starts after RG. Just needs that Murray-draw and that someone else can take out a top seed than himself.
Del Potro has been to 1 slam final and won it. He also has a big game in him and can also defeat Nadal and Federer. The only questionmark is Djokovic. But we already got enough "Can anyone defeat Djokovic?" threads going already and not even the other 3 in the top4 can defeat him right?

So obviously both Murray, Soderling, Del Potro are all knocking on the door of a slam. This isn't a mug era and it's not like the top4 seeds reaching the GS SFs has been a common occurrence in the last years anyway.

Trying to make a hen out of a feather won't prove any point. And before we know it some new talent takes out a top4 seed in Wimbledon. It can definitely happen. Even guys like Gasquet and Melzer have taken out Fed in Master 1000 tournaments this year for example. Murray has lost to around ranked100 players. What was the problem again?

EDIT: And should also note that Troicki should have taken him out in RG. He just choked but any normal player would have won that match. How do you choke from first 2-0 sets up and then from 5-2 in the fifth anyway? That close to the top4 thing falling in RG

MrChopin
06-01-2011, 11:14 PM
No this isn't a weak era and Sampras was a clown on clay.

This is the correct reply.

tkr
06-01-2011, 11:28 PM
No, no one has a chance unless they do something drastic with their brains. This FO has been an example in how your mental strength and clutch playing is almost everything in a slam. Almost, almost everyine has the game, but very few are mentally strong enough.

Pirata.
06-01-2011, 11:33 PM
Everyone ranked 7th and under is a clown :shrug:

Verdasco and Berdych looked like they were going to make big breakthroughs after last year and now look at Verdasco, losing first round at every tournament and Berdych with pathetic performances at USO and RG. Melzer and Monfils are good players, but their results are so erratic. One of the weakest top tens ever other than the top 6 (Ferrer isn't Big Four or a multiple finalist like Sod, but he is a solid player with good consistent results)

MayerFan
06-01-2011, 11:44 PM
No this isn't a weak era and Sampras was a clown on clay.

That must be why Sampras made it to the SF at RG and won a Masters on clay.

An absolute, utter "clown".

tests
06-01-2011, 11:47 PM
That must be why Sampras made it to the SF at RG and won a Masters on clay.

An absolute, utter "clown".


Murray made it to the SF, and will most likely win one or two masters on clay. He will still be a clown on clay... sampras is a clown on clay

MayerFan
06-01-2011, 11:51 PM
Murray made it to the SF, and will most likely win one or two masters on clay. He will still be a clown on clay... sampras is a clown on clay

http://i.qkme.me/eb6.jpg

stewietennis
06-01-2011, 11:57 PM
I was expecting a lot from Verdasco after AO 2009 – he gave Rafa more trouble than Roger did in the finals. Maybe that loss took a lot out of him.

Roadmap
06-02-2011, 12:18 AM
Rios and Coria played on eras where the players from ranks 5 to 20 where way stronger than they are now, therefore much more difficult to make sf and finals consistently. Its arguable if the top 3 of today is stronger or not than the ones years ago, but the second level players right now are just a disgrace to the sport.

Are you being serious mate. Coria wouldn't be able to reach 3 hardcourt slam finals (or even 1) in ANY era and you know it. The mighty Coria during his prime was almost beaten by post prime Henman ON CLAY and Murray is better on clay than Henman in my opinion so Murray could easily compete with and beat Coria on clay. And if Coria and Murray played on grass Murray wins 6-0 6-0 6-0. You should see a doctor mate.;)

MayerFan
06-02-2011, 12:24 AM
Rios and Coria played on eras where the players from ranks 5 to 20 where way stronger than they are now, therefore much more difficult to make sf and finals consistently. Its arguable if the top 3 of today is stronger or not than the ones years ago, but the second level players right now are just a disgrace to the sport.

I like your post.

Sham Kay
06-02-2011, 12:46 AM
All I've got from this thread is that Murray doesn't belong in any tier. The guys in a league of his own.

Oh and Sampras was a beauty to behold on clay. Moved like a gazelle.

Pipsy
06-02-2011, 12:59 AM
Losses to Young and Bogomolov Jr. aside, there are a whole heap of reasons why Murray should be considered the 4th most consistent player on tour:

- Holds #4 ranking
- Finished #4 last 3 seasons in a row
- Only spent 17 weeks outside of top 4 ranking since September 2008
- More Grand Slam finals in past 3 years than anyone outside of top 3 (3)
- More Grand Slam semi-finals in past 3 years than anyone outside of top 3 (6)
- In past 3 years won more Masters 1000 titles (SIX) than anyone other than Federer and Nadal
- One of only 7 players to win more than 5 Masters titles [1990-] (Nadal, Federer, Agassi, Sampras, Djokovic, Chang)
- Won more titles in 2009 than anyone else (6)
- Only player in 2011 other than top 3 to reach >1 semi-final in compulsory events (3)
- Made last 4 of WTF 2010 with Nadal, Federer and Djokovic
- Winning H2H vs Federer and other #4 contenders Soderling and del Potro
- Subjectively, one of few players who have shown any decent challenge to Nadal and Djokovic in matches this year

On balance, don't you think he probably deserves to be called the rightful 4th best player in the world?!

oranges
06-02-2011, 01:09 AM
On balance, don't you think he probably deserves to be called the rightful 4th best player in the world?!

I was not under the impression anyone was questioning he's rightful 4th, rather why the line is drawn at 4. Not much to differentiate between him and Soderling for he purposes of this topic. In short, both have shown capable of beating those above, just not in the final of a slam.

Pipsy
06-02-2011, 01:17 AM
Not much to differentiate between him and Soderling for he purposes of this topic.

After this tournament for instance Murray will have at least 6625 points (could even be 7105 if he's lucky or if a miracle happens 7905). Soderling will be languishing at 4595.

Also, there's probably the psychological propensity to say there's a "big four" rather than three or five due to the 2^n structure of tennis tournaments and seeding. It definitely helps to be the 4th best player in the world rather than the 5th...

bouncer7
06-02-2011, 01:20 AM
I just have looked race list and seen only one man race. Has someone said four??!

Johnny Groove
06-02-2011, 01:27 AM
Not yet.

Too many mugs.

Fat Camel
06-02-2011, 01:37 AM
Fognini, if he gives a shit.

oranges
06-02-2011, 02:30 AM
After this tournament for instance Murray will have at least 6625 points (could even be 7105 if he's lucky or if a miracle happens 7905). Soderling will be languishing at 4595.

Well, that accounts for him holding the 4th position, but as far as competing to win slams, I don't think there is any such significant difference. :shrug:

Also, there's probably the psychological propensity to say there's a "big four" rather than three or five due to the 2^n structure of tennis tournaments and seeding. It definitely helps to be the 4th best player in the world rather than the 5th...

Partly probably, but I seem to remember people referring to the big three a while ago.

Gabe32
06-02-2011, 02:39 AM
I think the multiple slams separate the top 3 and Murray. Murray is consistently good but can never make it happen on the biggest stages. Therefore I think there is only a "Big 3."

A healthy Del Potro also tops Murray, in my opinion.

paseo
06-02-2011, 02:43 AM
4 man race? There's only 3....











The King, The Fog, and The Gooch.

Roadmap
06-02-2011, 03:17 AM
Nalbandian if he avoids injuries. And Mcdonalds.

Priam
06-02-2011, 03:40 AM
Someone should compile a list of the rest of the guys vs the top 4 to see who has the best chance.

I think there was a thread before.

moon language
06-02-2011, 03:51 AM
This is what happens when all courts play at a similar speed. There are no specialists these days and as such the rankings are as accurate as they've ever been at showing the pecking order.

FiBeR
06-02-2011, 04:42 AM
sorry but Murray bends like a cheap tent in Slam Finals.
It is a 3-man race.

Murray is a step down from the big 3 force.
Right above Del Potro atm (but Delpo has a slam) then Soderling, Ferrer then the rest (Berdych, Verdasco, etc)

LawrenceOfTennis
06-02-2011, 06:31 AM
Del Potro will end this boring situation.

AncicCilic
06-02-2011, 07:29 AM
If you mean for longer periods of time there is only one atm and that's Del Potro. I think he's able to get a top 5 rank and stay there if he's healthy.

Topspindoctor
06-02-2011, 07:55 AM
Grigor Dimitrov will capture all 4 slams next year :eek::worship:

LawrenceOfTennis
06-02-2011, 07:58 AM
Grigor Dimitrov will capture all 4 slams next year :eek::worship:

huh....are you sure?

Forehander
06-02-2011, 08:19 AM
Troicki if he finds a brain somehow..

In all seriousness, I only see Pony troubling the big four in the near future.

What? :haha::haha::haha:

LawrenceOfTennis
06-02-2011, 09:09 AM
Tennis has never been this boring. Always the same 4-6 player everywhere. The majority here and around the world never get bored with this top 4 but I'm damn bored.

decrepitude
06-02-2011, 09:16 AM
Follow the Challenger Tour, and try to predict the next good player to shoot up the rankings from there? I've followed Murray since he was a junior and playing Futures.

Nathaliia
06-02-2011, 09:18 AM
Get on Pablo Carreno-Busta bandwagon :p

bokehlicious
06-02-2011, 09:18 AM
No this isn't a weak era and Sampras was a clown on clay.

This.

alter ego
06-02-2011, 09:20 AM
The MTF amnesia syndrom strikes again.
Last year's semifinalists were Nadal, Melzer, Berdych, Soderling.
2 years ago they were Federer, Gonzalez, Del Potro, Soderling.

xdrewitdajx
06-02-2011, 09:20 AM
it's not such a bad thing that the best players in the world are playing like the best players in the world and achieving results worthy of that status

iriraz
06-02-2011, 09:45 AM
I miss the old days though when the best on clay did well at the French but sucked at Wimbledon and vice versa.U knew Sampras would win Wimbledon but also u expected him to go out in first week at the French.
Now u expect same guys in semis and finals regardless of surface

Sonja1989
06-02-2011, 09:48 AM
LawrenceOfTennis, have to started 'weak era' too? :sad: :hug:

MaxPower
06-02-2011, 09:55 AM
The MTF amnesia syndrom strikes again.
Last year's semifinalists were Nadal, Melzer, Berdych, Soderling.
2 years ago they were Federer, Gonzalez, Del Potro, Soderling.

QFT. The goldfish memory around here is stunning. Seems to stretch about a week back or so.

I think it's quite a treat to have the top4 in semis for once. Murray was just a saved BP or so from going out!

Then the threads would look like:

"Is Murray done?" "Will Murray ever win a slam when he failed with the best draw ever?" and so on.

Need to calm down. Only 3 weeks to Wimbledon. Maybe Raonic serves Nadal out or something. Would be hilarious! For example both Federer and Murray has had some crazy losses this year. Djokovic on the other hand hasn't even lost to any player in the top10 including four(4) meetings with Nadal. That is where the issue is. Not that anyone can't beat the top4. Even Donald Young can beat a top4. The issue is that noone can beat Djokovic.

Fat Camel
06-02-2011, 10:14 AM
The same feelings.

All my expectations connected with Wimbledon. On grass some oldies can strike, remember semifinals with Schuettler, Safin, Haas, it wasn't long time ago. Maybe X-man this time finally with good draw or Raonic (yes, i know, he's not oldie).

And pity, that Rafa got Isner in RG, not in Wimbledon.

legolandbridge
06-02-2011, 10:15 AM
It's awesome. 4 top players are consistently the best and have developed histories and rivalries that are fascinating to watch. No better time in tennis.

TennisOnWood
06-02-2011, 10:18 AM
Oliver Golding will be the first player born in 1993. to play ATP tournament this year (WC for Queen's).. that's sad

I'm expecting a lot from Harrison and Carreno-Busta but its all going really slow at the moment

Oliboyz
06-02-2011, 10:32 AM
Follow the Challenger Tour, and try to predict the next good player to shoot up the rankings from there? I've followed Murray since he was a junior and playing Futures.

Completely agree with this post... I started to follow Djokovic when I saw him practise with Marat since his WC at Thailand Open 2004 even he lost to some random player in first round ... same as last year, I watched Berankis at Nottingham and now i am a big fan of him too ;)

Ouragan
06-02-2011, 10:43 AM
Boredo will return.

Raiden
06-02-2011, 10:55 AM
This so called "top 4" is on borrowed time, temporarily free-riding on the back of someone's physical malady.

JMDP will put an end to this stupid question/silly "debate"
.

Ouragan
06-02-2011, 10:59 AM
Losses to Young and Bogomolov Jr. aside, there are a whole heap of reasons why Murray should be considered the 4th most consistent player on tour:

- Holds #4 ranking
- Finished #4 last 3 seasons in a row
- Only spent 17 weeks outside of top 4 ranking since September 2008
- More Grand Slam finals in past 3 years than anyone outside of top 3 (3)
- More Grand Slam semi-finals in past 3 years than anyone outside of top 3 (6)
- In past 3 years won more Masters 1000 titles (SIX) than anyone other than Federer and Nadal
- One of only 7 players to win more than 5 Masters titles [1990-] (Nadal, Federer, Agassi, Sampras, Djokovic, Chang)
- Won more titles in 2009 than anyone else (6)
- Only player in 2011 other than top 3 to reach >1 semi-final in compulsory events (3)
- Made last 4 of WTF 2010 with Nadal, Federer and Djokovic
- Winning H2H vs Federer and other #4 contenders Soderling and del Potro
- Subjectively, one of few players who have shown any decent challenge to Nadal and Djokovic in matches this year

On balance, don't you think he probably deserves to be called the rightful 4th best player in the world?!

Interesting. But you forget Muster (8).

LawrenceOfTennis
06-02-2011, 11:10 AM
it's not such a bad thing that the best players in the world are playing like the best players in the world and achieving results worthy of that status

The problem is that tennis has only 4 consistant top players and not 7-8.

yuri27
06-02-2011, 11:17 AM
Del Potro on hardcourt,Gasquet on grass.

Helevorn
06-02-2011, 11:51 AM
The Vag has just destroyed Guez 6-2 6-0. Who cares about the top players.

MaxPower
06-02-2011, 12:09 PM
The problem is that tennis has only 4 consistant top players and not 7-8.

So may I ask what your demands are for being a consistant top player? Remember if you are seeded 5-8 and reach a QF you are in the final 8 and you are backing up your seeding.

Since Soderling got in there in 09 he has been lining up great results in big tournaments. QFs, SFs, F, W. Look at his ranking history at the atp site. He was even above Murray for nov 10 - apr 11

Ferrer has also been lining up great results since the past years. QFs, SFs, F and so on. Also very stable in the top10

Berdych had a solid 2010 with QFs, SFs, F and still a decent 2011 start with many QFs and can still back up his 2010 year with good results the rest of the year

I mean let us be serious: what kind of expectations is there in this forum on a top player? Doing solid results worthy of your seeding and often even better and being in the top10 for more than 2 years and running isn't enough so what does it take? 5 years in the top10? Slam wins? How many slam winners from seed 5-10 are there the past 5 years anyway?

ApproachShot
06-02-2011, 12:43 PM
I like Murray and all, he seems like a nice fellow but what's with this slotting him with the slam winners and then say "no one else has a chance to win a slam". Murray hasn't won a slam. He's been to 3 finals and never taken a set. Soderling has been to two finals and never taken a set but has defeated both Nadal and Federer in slams. So he obviously can win. He was world nr4 from november 2010 until april 2011 and his best part of the season starts after RG. Just needs that Murray-draw and that someone else can take out a top seed than himself.

I agree with this, but I think the reason why Soderling is not included in the 'big 4' is because of his relative performances against that of Murray's outside the slams. Of course Soderling's ranking hasn't helped him either as he has run into Nadal and in particular Federer several times at the QF stage.


The problem is that tennis has only 4 consistant top players and not 7-8.

But I think a pertinent point to make is this: there are only so many tournaments to be won, finals to be made and semifinals to be reached. The top few players are just so good and consistent that they can make it. As for the weak era argument, you can't have it both ways - top players can't be making more finals (a hallmark of great tennis players in the generation) and have more people in the top 10 making finals at the same time.
Unless of course if one would deem the era to be more competitive because the top 4 players are less consistent and thus fall earlier in the tournament...

Dr.Slice
06-02-2011, 01:02 PM
Please dont make me laugh. Murray better than Rios and Coria? :spit:
:rolls::rolls: Murray is not 2 classes above those guys, he is much more above those guys.

Taz Warrior
06-02-2011, 02:33 PM
You make it sound as if these 4 are always getting to the last 4 in the Slams when I think this is only the 2nd time it's happened (USO 08 being the other). Yes, most slams have 3 of them there but most of the time at least one of will be beaten before the semis.

sexybeast
06-02-2011, 02:46 PM
Look at the WTA, the top 4 is there not capable of doing anything at all. In fact ever since the belgian duo and the sisters disappeared (sometimes they reappear just to win another grand slam) the whole tour has become a joke, no one can predict in anyway who is going to appear in GS semifinals and finals, 30 year old Schiavone suddenly seems to be the best claycourter in the world and the world number 1 is destroyed in one grand slam after the other.

A joke it is, but some people like a good joke and something to laugh about, I do enjoy a good laught myself and I did laught when for example old Agassi suddenly found himself in company with Meligeni, Medvedev and Hrbaty in RG semifinal. However I wont complain when good tennis is played by top players even if it does get a little bit boring to see patterns repeat themselves over and over again.

Clydey
06-02-2011, 03:06 PM
Well, that accounts for him holding the 4th position, but as far as competing to win slams, I don't think there is any such significant difference. :shrug:



MS titles count for something. There's a reason why Andy is one of a few players to have won more than 5. Whether or not Murray freezes in major finals isn't all that relevant. The point is that the top 4 players dominate the tour. It's a little silly to suggest that Murray belongs in a category with Soderling, particularly when has achieved a hell of a lot more and has shown repeatedly that he is capable of beating the top 3.

oranges
06-02-2011, 03:06 PM
:rolls::rolls: Murray is not 2 classes above those guys, he is much more above those guys.

Possibly, in Virtua Tennis ;)

oranges
06-02-2011, 03:08 PM
MS titles count for something. There's a reason why Andy is one of a few players to have won more than 5. Whether or not Murray freezes in major finals isn't all that relevant. The point is that the top 4 players dominate the tour. It's a little silly to suggest that Murray belongs in a category with Soderling, particularly when has achieved a hell of a lot more and has shown repeatedly that he is capable of beating the top 3.

No, they don't count for shit when it comes to winning slams or else Murray would have one by now. I'm not sure how many times I'd need to repeat I was referring to the topic at hand :wavey:

Clydey
06-02-2011, 03:12 PM
You make it sound as if these 4 are always getting to the last 4 in the Slams when I think this is only the 2nd time it's happened (USO 08 being the other). Yes, most slams have 3 of them there but most of the time at least one of will be beaten before the semis.

Top 4 seeds did not get to the semis at USO 2008.

Taz Warrior
06-02-2011, 03:14 PM
Top 4 seeds did not get to the semis at USO 2008.

I know

Clydey
06-02-2011, 03:16 PM
No, they don't count for shit when it comes to winning slams or else Murray would have one by now. I'm not sure how many times I'd need to repeat I was referring to the topic at hand :wavey:

The point is that he is putting himself in a position to win slams. And the fact that Murray has consistently beaten the top 3 outside of slams means that people actually believe he can win in a major final. Why do you think so many pick Murray to win when he gets to a slam final, whereas relatively few people pick Soderling? Our expectations are tied to what happens at MS events, not just the majors.

Sapeod
06-02-2011, 03:30 PM
Why is Muzza put in the Big 4? Because how long have they reached finals, semi-finals and won titles? he's been no.4 for 3/4 years, he's been no.2. He has 3 slam finals, 3 semi-finals and 6 masters titles. He is knocking on the door of a slam everytime he plays in one. Muzza is in the Big 4 because only they can win multiple large tournaments (slams, masters). You can't not add Muzza to the Big 4 just because he doesn't have a slam. He's still in contention every time and wins some large tournaments. He's certainly above the rest of the field. Del Potro can be added to the Big 5, but only when he gets back to that form that saw him destroy Nadal.

Sapeod
06-02-2011, 03:39 PM
Possibly, in Virtua Tennis ;)
Muzza >>>> Rios and Coria. More titles than Coria (only 2 less than Rios though, though Andy's only 24), 3 slam finals (each of them only had 1 each), 3 semi-finals (they had 0 each) and 6 masters (more than both). Nothing more to say. Pretty straightforward.

peribsen
06-02-2011, 04:15 PM
Why is Muzza put in the Big 4? Because how long have they reached finals, semi-finals and won titles? he's been no.4 for 3/4 years, he's been no.2. He has 3 slam finals, 3 semi-finals and 6 masters titles. He is knocking on the door of a slam everytime he plays in one. Muzza is in the Big 4 because only they can win multiple large tournaments (slams, masters). You can't not add Muzza to the Big 4 just because he doesn't have a slam. He's still in contention every time and wins some large tournaments. He's certainly above the rest of the field. Del Potro can be added to the Big 5, but only when he gets back to that form that saw him destroy Nadal.

The fact that Murray is clearly well above the rest doesn't in any way mean he is at the same level as Djoko, far less than the big 2. He may be the guy with the biggest chance of joining them, but he's still very far away, and the occasional win won't change that until he bags several -at least 6- slams (same goes for Nole). Many run the risk of mistaking current form with long term standing in the sport's history.

Filo V.
06-02-2011, 04:34 PM
Murray doesn't belong in the same category as the other 3 players.

Filo V.
06-02-2011, 04:35 PM
It's really:

Djokovic
.
.
Nadal
.
.
.
Federer

----------------------

Murray

----------------------

Everyone else

NoFroz
06-02-2011, 05:02 PM
I don't think the problem is it being a 4 man race but the whole "Djokovic&Nadal def Federer&Murray; Djokovic def Nadal" thing, and I say this as a Djokovic fan. If every match within the top 4 (or top 5 with JMDP) could go either way, we wouldn't have that much of a problem with a big 4 (big 5).

Besides, tennis is driven by a strong centripetal force IMO, there is a strong tendency to concentration which I don't think would allow a strong and fairly equal top 10. Once you got a bunch of consistent players who are capable of getting to SF often, the players behind will be expected not only not to reach SF, but also to be upseted more often by journymen, as they lack the confidence and ambition to get deep.

For me the choice is between a strong top 4-5 (2008-) or a very defined top 2 (or even top 1) with a fairly equal top 10-15 (2004-2006). A situation of a strong top 10, that many of us advocate is almost impossible for me.

FiBeR
06-02-2011, 05:14 PM
it took 24 years for Murray to reach all 4 GS Finals and yet he hasnt won any.. :confused: how come he is considered a force equal to Nadal, Federer & Djokovic when he hasn't won any slam and is not capable of winning a set in a slam final??

Federer won more GS than anybody else.. Nadal is the second active player with more slams and beats Federer. Djokovic won 2 slams and beat Nadal and Federer regularly (Federer in slams, Nadal not yet) plus he has not lost a match this year.

Murray on the other hand.. lost 3 slams finals without being able to win a set and bar Nadal (who leads 3-2 in slams h2h) he hasn't beaten any of these players in Slams (0-2 vs Federer, 0-0 vs Nole)

if all, Murray is a threat to Nadal on HC slams but this is clay and being Murray's weakest surface how can you say that he is one of the big four being slamless? :p rankingwise only.. but then he is very hyped cos slamwise he is just above Soderling (2 RG finals) but people don't hype Soderking this much.. why? :confused:

also Murray should be under Soderling in RG cos he has no slam finals vs 2 for Soderling..

IMO Murray could be on a level similar to Soderling in the discussion.. considering the overall said

In a nutshell:

*Big 3 = Djokovic, Nadal, Federer
_____________________________
Murray, Soderling
_____________________________
rest of cast

oranges
06-02-2011, 05:22 PM
The point is that he is putting himself in a position to win slams. And the fact that Murray has consistently beaten the top 3 outside of slams means that people actually believe he can win in a major final. Why do you think so many pick Murray to win when he gets to a slam final, whereas relatively few people pick Soderling? Our expectations are tied to what happens at MS events, not just the majors.

For me the point is there is the big three, not four. If you want to go further down the line, like I said not much that separates him from Soderling as far as slam success goes. It's really not rocket science. I'm not arguing at all that he's overall achievements aren't already greater, just that there's no merit for drawing the line with him. There's nothing that puts him in the company of the trio and not Soderling. And BTW masters are ranking points galore and a nice bonus to your CV, but that's it. If you end your career slamless, 30 would not help you make it up.

Gagsquet
06-02-2011, 05:28 PM
We have a strong top 8 Imo (the current live top 8)
After, some clowns are overranked as Fish,Roddick and Melzer (but he is'nt top 10 anymore)
Just switch Rod and Fish by Gasquet and Waw and the top 10 will be fine.
And make that Troicki, Melzer fall in rankings

JediFed
06-02-2011, 06:23 PM
Interesting. I believe this is the strongest top 4 they've ever had, since the days of Wilander, Connors, McEnroe and Lendl.

Singularity
06-02-2011, 06:37 PM
For me the point is there is the big three, not four. If you want to go further down the line, like I said not much that separates him from Soderling as far as slam success goes.
Well, in the slams Murray has 3 finals, 3 semi finals and two quarter finals, while Soderling has just two finals and four quarter finals. That's a significant difference IMO.

Soderling has got past the quarter finals twice (in one event), while Murray has done this 6 times (in all four slams).

JediFed
06-02-2011, 06:43 PM
Just two eras have been stronger.

End of 1981 with this configuration:

McEnroe
Connors
Borg
Lendl.

Which was the strongest in history.

Second strongest is from January 1984 to March of 1986.

This power 4 is strong but Murray is still a year shy of Wilander for consecutive weeks in the top 5. Fed has passed McEnroe for consecutive weeks top 5, and Rafa has passed Wilander. Connors beats Fed, Lendl beats Rafa, McEnroe beats Djokovic and Wilander beats Murray.

3/1986 (1) - Lendl
3/1986 (2) - McEnroe
3/1986 (3) - Wilander
3/1986 (4) - Connors

1/1984 (1) - McEnroe
1/1984 (2) - Lendl
1/1984 (3) - Connors
1/1984 (4) - Wilander

MayerFan
06-02-2011, 07:10 PM
:rolls::rolls: Murray is not 2 classes above those guys, he is much more above those guys.

Murray is much better than Coria outside clay, that's for sure.

One can't say the same about Rios. Rios was much more talented than Murray.

MayerFan
06-02-2011, 07:12 PM
Muzza >>>> Rios and Coria. More titles than Coria (only 2 less than Rios though, though Andy's only 24), 3 slam finals (each of them only had 1 each), 3 semi-finals (they had 0 each) and 6 masters (more than both). Nothing more to say. Pretty straightforward.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ljo1mnUypQ1qh6cwv.jpg

Yeah right.

Clydey
06-02-2011, 07:24 PM
For me the point is there is the big three, not four. If you want to go further down the line, like I said not much that separates him from Soderling as far as slam success goes. It's really not rocket science. I'm not arguing at all that he's overall achievements aren't already greater, just that there's no merit for drawing the line with him. There's nothing that puts him in the company of the trio and not Soderling. And BTW masters are ranking points galore and a nice bonus to your CV, but that's it. If you end your career slamless, 30 would not help you make it up.

In terms of slam success alone, there is little that separates him from Soderling. However, I think most people recognise that Murray can and oftentimes should beat the top 3 in majors, purely based on the success he has had outside of them. Whether or not you agree with that, it appears to be the reasoning that many MTFers and pundits go with.

GugaF1
06-02-2011, 08:24 PM
it's not such a bad thing that the best players in the world are playing like the best players in the world and achieving results worthy of that status

Exactly, I remeber in 2002-2003 some people were complaining that the top players weren't consistent enough, that were too many changes in the top, with the top seeds losing too much. And now that he have top 5 players that truly play like it and have competitive battles between them, some people find also reasons to complain. Go figures.

oranges
06-02-2011, 08:28 PM
I'm not sure people expect him to beat the top 3 any more than they do Soderling and even if they do, what do expectations have to do with actual success. Achievement-wise, he's not in the league with the top 3. Might have noticed many MTF pundits went with that interpretation too ;)
Either way, I'm not even sure why I'm arguing here. I initially commented Pipsy's post primarily because it seemed he thought his position as No4 was being questioned, rather than the grouping.

amonb
06-02-2011, 09:20 PM
I don't think so. The level of tennis nowadays is pitiful.So why watch??? Go away and follow another sport. Nobody cares about what you've got to say!!!!!

vn01
06-02-2011, 09:24 PM
we have del potro. when he finds his 2009 form back, we'll have a 5 man race ;) and this moment will come very soon.

Henry Kaspar
06-02-2011, 09:30 PM
Who is the 4th man?

Sophocles
06-02-2011, 10:32 PM
It's reasonable to talk about the Big 4 because the same 4 players have been remarkably stable for a long time holding the top 4 rankings. I mean, that's just obvious.

Incidentally, they're also the only 4 active players (I'm not counting Nalbandian as active) to have reached the semis or better in all 4 slams.

DrJules
06-02-2011, 11:08 PM
Expect top 4 to open bigger gap with rest of field.

Soderling will fall further behind Murray now he failed to defend final loss of last year.

leng jai
06-02-2011, 11:52 PM
Haas will find his rhythm soon.

Haas has his rhythm already. Plays awesome for a month, then mediocre for two until hes eventually injured and out for a year.

Roadmap
06-03-2011, 01:38 AM
NADULL is capable of ending the current Top 4 by admitting his guilt and retiring for the sake of TENNIS

MayerFan
06-03-2011, 01:42 AM
So why watch??? Go away and follow another sport. Nobody cares about what you've got to say!!!!!

I'm not a fairweather fan like you.

freeandlonely
06-03-2011, 02:09 AM
Mentally speaking only JMDP has shown what is needed, so still gonna say JMDP atm, but this year not likely.

shiaben
06-03-2011, 02:18 AM
Not at the moment. Del Potro's a big IF, and the thing that stuck out in our minds was snatching a single set from Djokovic.

cajuntennis
06-03-2011, 02:26 AM
monfils

Sri
06-03-2011, 02:37 AM
There is no Big 4. There is the Big 1. Come back when Nadal + Djoke + Del Pot + Murray have the same number of slams as Fed.

On current form, Nadal is miles ahead of the rest. Djoke's on a hot streak. Olderer is, well, old. Del Pot is injured and Murray is a mug.

Topspindoctor
06-03-2011, 02:38 AM
There is no Big 4. There is the Big 1. Come back when Nadal + Djoke + Del Pot + Murray have the same number of slams as Fed.

On current form, Nadal is miles ahead of the rest. Djoke's on a hot streak. Olderer is, well, old. Del Pot is injured and Murray is a mug.

Typical Fedtard arrogance.

Sri
06-03-2011, 02:41 AM
Typical Fedtard arrogance.
Typical Rafatard bitching. ;-)