Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 69 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
This forum has turned to shite again! Trolls out in spectacular force, sad to see. So how about the tennis fans amongst us discuss some actual tennis. Hypothetical of course, but if Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray didn't exist, how many slams do you think the following players would have and why?

Ferrer, Tsonga, Wawrinka, Del Potro, Berdych and Gasquet :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,734 Posts
Ferrer 4
Tsonga 5
Wawrinka 3
del Potro 10+
Berdych 5
Gasquet 0
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,921 Posts
Delpo could play without a wrist and have over 10
I miss him he actually has the talent and balls to challenge the big 4
 

·
Bring it Home
Joined
·
20,320 Posts
Difficult to predict, other players could've emerged too, depending on the matchup.

The biggest winners would've been guys like Safin, Hewitt, Davydenko and Nalbandian actually. Even Roddick in Wimbledon. :shrug:

Ferrer is too much of a choker to be a multi-slam winner, so I'd say maybe 1 RG.
Tsonga may've won 1 Wimbledon and 1 Aussie.
Wawrinka only emerged as a force in 2013, so maybe US Open 2013 to go along with Aussie 14 he already won.
Del Potro too much injury issues and also too many upsets early. Maybe 2 more.
Berdych probably Wimbledon 2010.
Gasquet maybe 1 too, but most likely slamless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,042 Posts
It's hard to say because I imagine other players who seem relatively insignificant now could've sneaked a grand slam. Robredo might have won a French Open, for example. But yes, Del Potro would be the leader I believe. Even with the big 4, if his wrist had not been an issue, he would definitely have at least a couple more slams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,304 Posts
Wimbledon 14 - Tsonga
RG 14 - Gulbis
USO 13 - Wawrinka
Wimbledon 13 - Del Potro
RG 13 - Wawrinka
AO 13 - Ferrer
USO 12 - Berdych
Wimby 12 - Tsonga
RG 12 - Ferrer
AO 12 - Berdych
USO 11 - Roddick
Wimby 11 - Tsonga
RG 11 - Soderling
AO 11 - Wawrinka
USO 10 - Youzhny
Wimby 10 - Berdych
RG 10 - Soderling
AO 10 - Cilic
Wimby 09 - Roddick
RG 09 - Soderling
AO 09 - Verdasco
USO 08 - Del Potro
Wimby 08 - Safin
RG 08 - Monfils
AO 08 - Tsonga
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
520 Posts
Big 4? Who's "big 4"?

Why don't we just throw Wawrinka in there and call them "Big 5"? Or add DelPo and call them "Big 6"?

There's only Big 3, they have 38 Grand Slams among them, then a HUUUGE gap down to the rest. Big 4 was invented by British media in a desperate attempt to steal for their player some glory from players that were actually winning slams.

And just to make it clear: I like Murray. I hope he wins more slams. But right now, he is nowhere near the "Big 3".
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,779 Posts
Big 4? Who's "big 4"?

Why don't we just throw Wawrinka in there and call them "Big 5"? Or add DelPo and call them "Big 6"?

There's only Big 3, they have 38 Grand Slams among them, then a HUUUGE gap down to the rest. Big 4 was invented by British media in a desperate attempt to steal for their player some glory from players that were actually winning slams.

And just to make it clear: I like Murray. I hope he wins more slams. But right now, he is nowhere near the "Big 3".
inb4 Mickey-mouse tournaments and olympic-gold-that-nobody-cares-about
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,779 Posts
Maybe someone who could have been an absolute GOAT of the sport had to quit before his career could ever take off due to some personal/health issues. And maybe this guy would have obliterated the BIG 4 as we know it winning all slams to himself. Then you'd be asking "If this guy didn't exist, how many slams would the rest of the field have won?" Simple answer: you won't know. Cause things are how they are, you can't change it. Would have been's and could have been's don't matter in this sport.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Big 4? Who's "big 4"?

Why don't we just throw Wawrinka in there and call them "Big 5"? Or add DelPo and call them "Big 6"?

There's only Big 3, they have 38 Grand Slams among them, then a HUUUGE gap down to the rest. Big 4 was invented by British media in a desperate attempt to steal for their player some glory from players that were actually winning slams.

And just to make it clear: I like Murray. I hope he wins more slams. But right now, he is nowhere near the "Big 3".
I am a big Murray fan but for years I also challenged the big 4 tag which some even said when Andy didn't have a slam. But the thing is, even though he may not be as dominant he still has 2 slams and an OG and is always there at the tail end of big events along with the other 3, hence why it is the big 4 tag. I get what you mean though :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,010 Posts
Big 4? Who's "big 4"?

Why don't we just throw Wawrinka in there and call them "Big 5"? Or add DelPo and call them "Big 6"?

There's only Big 3, they have 38 Grand Slams among them, then a HUUUGE gap down to the rest. Big 4 was invented by British media in a desperate attempt to steal for their player some glory from players that were actually winning slams.

And just to make it clear: I like Murray. I hope he wins more slams. But right now, he is nowhere near the "Big 3".
Look, i realise it's hard for some people to comprehend but big 4 is not just about how many slams they won. It encapsulates semi finals reached, slam finals reached and masters wins etc. Wawrinka is not big 5 as he's reached 1 final and has won 1 masters, Del potro also has won 1 slam in the only final he reached.

These 4 guys are the only 4 who've reached all 4 slam semis in the same year, and the only 4 who've reached the slam semis of all 4 majors at least twice.

The British press did not coin the phrase big 4, it originated around 2011 and was first mentioned by media in the USA.

Just because Murray is the weakest aspect of the big 4, does not mean he isn't part of it, his records stand apart from everyone else not called Djokovic, Nadal or Federer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Look, i realise it's hard for some people to comprehend but big 4 is not just about how many slams they won. It encapsulates semi finals reached, slam finals reached and masters wins etc. Wawrinka is not big 5 as he's reached 1 final and has won 1 masters, Del potro also has won 1 slam in the only final he reached.

These 4 guys are the only 4 who've reached all 4 slam semis in the same year, and the only 4 who've reached the slam semis of all 4 majors at least twice.

The British press did not coin the phrase big 4, it originated around 2011 and was first mentioned by media in the USA.

Just because Murray is the weakest aspect of the big 4, does not mean he isn't part of it, his records stand apart from everyone else not called Djokovic, Nadal or Federer.
Exactly this :worship:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57,598 Posts
Wimbledon 14 - Wawrinka
RG 14 - Ferrer
USO 13 - Wawrinka
Wimbly 13 - Del Potro
RG 13 - Ferrer
AO 13 - Wawrinka
USO 12 - Ferrer
Wimby 12 - Ferrer (Call me crazy, but he was playing great and had to choke to lose to Murray)
RG 12 - Ferrer
AO 12 - Ferrer
USO 11 - Tipsarveic
Wimby 11 - Tsonga
RG 11 - Soderling
AO 11 - Ferrer
USO 10 - Soderling
Wimby 10 - Tsonga
RG 10 - Soderling
AO 10 - Davydenko
Wimby 09 - Roddick
RG 09 - Soderling
AO 09 - Roddick (No WAY does Verdasco keep it together in a Slam final)
USO 08 - Roddick
Wimby 08 - Hewitt
RG 08 - Gonzalez
AO 08 - Tsonga

ferrer has 7 Slams- including a calendar slam in 2012 :lol:, Roddick 4 (Well, more, this is starting in '08), Soderling 4
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,059 Posts
Look, i realise it's hard for some people to comprehend but big 4 is not just about how many slams they won. It encapsulates semi finals reached, slam finals reached and masters wins etc. Wawrinka is not big 5 as he's reached 1 final and has won 1 masters, Del potro also has won 1 slam in the only final he reached.

These 4 guys are the only 4 who've reached all 4 slam semis in the same year, and the only 4 who've reached the slam semis of all 4 majors at least twice.

The British press did not coin the phrase big 4, it originated around 2011 and was first mentioned by media in the USA.

Just because Murray is the weakest aspect of the big 4, does not mean he isn't part of it, his records stand apart from everyone else not called Djokovic, Nadal or Federer.


Exactly.Andy is a worthy member of the BIG 4.Once he stops sucking I hope
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,577 Posts
2003 WI: Roddick
2004 AO: Safin
2004 WI: Roddick
2004 US: Agassi
2005 RG: Puerta
2005 WI: Roddick
2005 US: Hewitt
2006 AO: Davydenko
2006 RG: Nalbandian
2006 WI: Ancic
2006 US: Blake
2007 AO: Gonzalez
2007 RG: Davydenko
2007 WI: Gasquet
2007 US: Davydenko
2008 AO: Tsonga
2008 RG: Monfils (scary thought)
2008 WI: Gasquet
2008 US: Del Potro
2009 AO: Verdasco
2009 RG: Del Potro (beat Soderling on clay handily)
2009 WI: Roddick
2009 US: Del Potro
2010 AO: Davydenko
2010 RG: Soderling
2010 WI: Soderling (dominated Tsonga and Berdych in H2H)
2010 US: Soderling
2011 AO: Ferrer
2011 RG: Soderling
2011 WI: Del Potro (I was impressed by Pot in his match against Nadal. I think he would have gone all the way)
2011 US: Tsonga
2012 AO: Berdych
2012 RG: Ferrer
2012 WI: Tsonga
2012 US: Del Potro
2013 AO: Wawrinka
2013 RG: Ferrer
2013 WI: Del Potro
2013 US: Wawrinka
2014 AO: Wawrinka
2014 RG: Ferrer
2014 WI: Wawrinka

Total tally (including those already won before big 4 era):

Code:
Agassi:         9 slams
Del Potro:      6 slams 
Roddick:        5 slams
Davydenko:      4 slams
Soderling:      4 slams
Ferrer:         4 slams
Wawrinka:       4 slams 
Safin:          3 slams
Hewitt:         3 slams
Tsonga:         3 slams
Gasquet:        2 slams
Nalbandian:     1 slam
Puerta:         1 slam 
Ancic:          1 slam
Blake:          1 slam
Gonzalez:       1 slam
Monfils:        1 slam
Verdasco:       1 slam
Berdych:        1 slam
all in all, many more 1 slam wonders

pretty amazing that even without the domination of the big 3 + Andy Murray, the most slams won by a single player would be 6 (Del Potro). But I think without the injury, Del Potro would win at least 10. I also think that without surface homogenization, players like Gasquet and Roddick wouldn't have turned out the way they did, so it's tough to predict exactly how many slams they would win. I think it'd be even more than what I listed here, considering they wouldn't change their playstyles to try to combat the big 4, and that would have helped them out against other players. And who knows, maybe players like Nalbandian and Safin would have been motivated to be at the top of their games without the big 4 around. Too many variables to account for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,559 Posts
WI 2003- Roddick
US 2003- Roddick
AO 2004- Safin
RG 2004- Gaudio
WI 2004- Roddick
US 2004- Agassi
AO 2005- Safin
RG 2005- Puerta
WI 2005- Roddick
US 2005- Agassi
AO 2006- Davydenko
RG 2006- Nalbandian
WI 2006- Baghdatis
US 2006- Roddick
AO 2007- Gonzalez
RG 2007- Robredo
WI 2007- Baghdatis
US 2007- Roddick
AO 2008- Tsonga
RG 2008- Gonzalez
WI 2008- Safin
US 2008- Roddick
AO 2009- Verdasco
RG 2009- Soderling
WI 2009- Roddick
US 2009- Del Potro
AO 2010- Davydenko
RG 2010- Soderling
WI 2010- Berdych
US 2010- Soderling
AO 2011- Ferrer
RG 2011- Soderling
WI 2011- Tsonga
US 2011- Roddick
AO 2012- Berdych
RG 2012- Ferrer
WI 2012- Tsonga
US 2012- Ferrer
AO 2013- Ferrer
RG 2013- Ferrer
WI 2013- Del Potro
US 2013- Wawrinka
AO 2014- Wawrinka
RG 2014- Ferrer
WI 2014- Dimitrov

So from Wimbledon 2003-

Roddick 9
Ferrer 6
Soderling 4
Safin 3
Tsonga 3
Agassi 2
Davydenko 2
Del Potro 2
Berdych 2
Baghdatis 2
Gonzalez 2
Wawrinka 2
Gaudio 1
Puerta 1
Nalbandian 1
Robredo 1
Verdasco 1
Dimitrov 1
 
1 - 20 of 69 Posts
Top