PDA

View Full Version : The Faboulous 4? Or the Rising 7?


isbisthebest
02-18-2007, 04:24 AM
Starting from 1989 to 2005, there were four major names to remember. Chang, Courier, Agassi, and Sampras. Together, they obtained 27 Grandslams. During the era, people called them: the faboulous 4.

After Sampras' retirement in 2002 and Andre Agassi's gradual decrease in competition, 4 new names came within people's notice. Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, and finally, the formidable Roger Federer. People saw these four names as the next generation that would dominate the ATP circuit. These four new names replaced the four old names. Up to today, they have already taken 15 Grandslams in total. The best representation was the 2005 Australian open semi final draw.
(1) Federer vs (3) Safin
(2) Hewitt vs (4) Roddick

However, things aren't going along the same lines as what the public has been predicting. Other then Federer and Roddick, Safin and Hewitt has been suffering from injuries and has continuously dropped in rankings due to early round losses and minimal attendence in competitions. They could no longer dominate the ATP circuit like the American Faboulous 4 had once done 10 years ago.
Today, the rankings are:
Roger Federer (1)
Andy Roddick (4)
Lleyton Hewitt (18 )
Marat Safin (24)

Another generation of youngesters have entered the spotlight. Led by Rafael Nadal with two grandslams, the other names are Tomas Berdych, Andy Murray, Novak Djokovik, Richard Gasquet, Marcos Baghdatis, and Gaels Mondils. They are continuing to threat the current positions of the Faboulous 4, with Nadal beating Federer and Murray beating Roddick. They can be seen as the Rising 7 in the current era of Tennis.

Rankings:
Nadal (2)
Berdych (12)
Murray (13)
Dijokovik (14)
Gasquet (16)
Baghdatis (17)
Monfils (54)

What do you think will happen in the future. Will the Faboulous 4 led by Federer continue to dominate? For how long? Or will the Rising 7 led by Nadal overpower them and create a dominating era of their own. How so? Why so?

Hartzy
02-18-2007, 04:30 AM
Honestly, I don't understand why you mentioned Chang. He won one grand slam whereas other players achieved more success in that time period such as Becker.

Secondly, I find your analysis kind of pointless. Tennis is tennis and the sky won't fall if 4 players aren't dominating the slams. This kind of reminds me of Madden trying to make these artificial points in football that lead to nothing at all.

4brotherdrive
02-18-2007, 04:35 AM
At one point in the future I believe Federer(if he doesnt retire when he starts losing dominance) will get dominated by the shot-makers(Gasquet,Murray,Baghdatis?) of the rising 7 and Nadal, but not all of them. Roddick will get dominated by most of them. This won't happen until about 2-4 years though imo.
But like the above poster mentioned these are just predictions.

Baghdatis72
02-18-2007, 04:40 AM
I think Federer will improve even more and it will be hard for others to dominate him but it's possible with all these young guns rising fast.

Condoleezza
02-18-2007, 04:42 AM
Starting from 1989 to 2005, there were four major names to remember. Chang, Courier, Agassi, and Sampras. Together, they obtained 27 Grandslams. During the era, people called them: the faboulous 4. .....

Wrong.
You have to add Andy Roddick. Together with Chang, Courier, Agassi and Sampras they were called the fabulous 5.

Same with the women.
Starting from 1927 until 2007, there were seven major names to remember. Wills-Moody, Connolly, King, Evert, Navratilova, Venus and Serena. Together they obtained 89 slams. During that era people called them: The fabulous 7.
Some add Davenport, Jacobs and Capriati and call them all the fabulous 10.

Condi

illkhiboy
02-18-2007, 04:51 AM
Very true Condi, good observation. My girlfriend wants me to add her as the Fabolous 11. But frankly, she hasn't won a Slam yet. And she doesn't have a serve. Actually she sprays a lot of balls from the baseline off both wings.

Of course, Condi also forgot Hingis, so now the Fab 11 has a phenomenal total of 94.

OrangeOne
02-18-2007, 04:52 AM
Starting from 1989 to 2005, there were four major names to remember. Chang, Courier, Agassi, and Sampras. Together, they obtained 27 Grandslams. During the era, people called them: the faboulous 4.

Err, did they? Have you forgotten about errr... Becker, Edberg, even Lendl still won a couple of AOs in that period? Rafter won a couple of UOs too, all more than Chang! There's others too, but yeah...

In fact Becker and Edberg won 7 collectively in that period, and yet only played for the first half of it, and had won some before that period.

Courier and Chang combined won 'only' 5 by comparison .... maybe you see my point better now still?

Any-which-way, right now we're seeing domination like we've not seen in most of our lifetimes, so it's all paling into comparison...

Condoleezza
02-18-2007, 05:32 AM
Very true Condi, good observation. My girlfriend wants me to add her as the Fabolous 11. But frankly, she hasn't won a Slam yet. And she doesn't have a serve. Actually she sprays a lot of balls from the baseline off both wings.

Of course, Condi also forgot Hingis, so now the Fab 11 has a phenomenal total of 94.

Hingis is not American.
Neither is your girl-friend, I suppose ...

Condi

illkhiboy
02-18-2007, 08:07 AM
Condi were you serious writing your first post? I thought I smelled sarcasm. ANyway the OP in his "Fab 7" had a bunch of nationalities.

Shabazza
02-18-2007, 08:22 AM
Err, did they? Have you forgotten about errr... Becker, Edberg, even Lendl still won a couple of AOs in that period? Rafter won a couple of UOs too, all more than Chang! There's others too, but yeah...

In fact Becker and Edberg won 7 collectively in that period, and yet only played for the first half of it, and had won some before that period.

Courier and Chang combined won 'only' 5 by comparison .... maybe you see my point better now still?

Any-which-way, right now we're seeing domination like we've not seen in most of our lifetimes, so it's all paling into comparison...

Ditto. Calling Chang or even Courier one of the 4 best players of their time is ridiculous.
This guy is either joking or has no clue what he's talking about.

Shabazza
02-18-2007, 08:26 AM
Today, the rankings are:
Roger Federer (1)
Andy Roddick (4)
Lleyton Hewitt (18 )
Marat Safin (24)

Another generation of youngesters have entered the spotlight. Led by Rafael Nadal with two grandslams, the other names are Tomas Berdych, Andy Murray, Novak Djokovik, Richard Gasquet, Marcos Baghdatis, and Gaels Mondils. They are continuing to threat the current positions of the Faboulous 4, with Nadal beating Federer and Murray beating Roddick. They can be seen as the Rising 7 in the current era of Tennis.

Rankings:
Nadal (2)
Berdych (12)
Murray (13)
Dijokovik (14)
Gasquet (16)
Baghdatis (17)
Monfils (54)

What do you think will happen in the future. Will the Faboulous 4 led by Federer continue to dominate? For how long? Or will the Rising 7 led by Nadal overpower them and create a dominating era of their own. How so? Why so?

Apart from Federer none of those other 3 guys is dominating or even winning enough against the new group (Roddick is the only one, holding his own more or less). Your question is already obsolete.

Grimjack
02-18-2007, 08:35 AM
They can be seen as the Rising 7 in the current era of Tennis.

Rankings:
Nadal (2)
Berdych (12)
Murray (13)
Dijokovik (14)
Gasquet (16)
Baghdatis (17)
Monfils (54)


What the hell has this guy done to merit a place in this discussion? He parlayed a couple adequate claycourt tournaments into a career high that still didn't place him in the top 20, and proceeded to follow that up with a later 2/3 of a year that were absolutely God-awful.

Yes, I'm aware he's young, but lots of guys are young. In order to be a riser, don't you have to actually be rising, rather than plummetting? Or at least have to have risen at some point?

Good junior player, decent prospect, but has no place in a discussion of the game's coming elite at this point. He's just not good enough.

Condoleezza
02-18-2007, 08:51 AM
Condi were you serious writing your first post? I thought I smelled sarcasm. ...

What gave it away?
Roddick? Or was it only Capriati .... ?


.... ANyway the OP in his "Fab 7" had a bunch of nationalities.

Well, he couldn't exclude this Federer guy .....

Condi

arnz
02-18-2007, 09:05 AM
Mark my words, Andy Murray will be no. 2, and I predict he will take a slam. My crystal ball tells me this will start in 2008 :)

travlerajm
02-18-2007, 09:25 AM
Mark my words, Andy Murray will be no. 2, and I predict he will take a slam. My crystal ball tells me this will start in 2008 :)

Since he's the number three favorite in the Vegas books to win Wimbledon and the US Open, it seems others think so too.

8PAQ
02-18-2007, 09:35 AM
Starting from 1989 to 2005, there were four major names to remember. Chang, Courier, Agassi, and Sampras. Together, they obtained 27 Grandslams. During the era, people called them: the faboulous 4.

After Sampras' retirement in 2002 and Andre Agassi's gradual decrease in competition, 4 new names came within people's notice. Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, and finally, the formidable Roger Federer. People saw these four names as the next generation that would dominate the ATP circuit. These four new names replaced the four old names. Up to today, they have already taken 15 Grandslams in total. The best representation was the 2005 Australian open semi final draw.
(1) Federer vs (3) Safin
(2) Hewitt vs (4) Roddick

However, things aren't going along the same lines as what the public has been predicting. Other then Federer and Roddick, Safin and Hewitt has been suffering from injuries and has continuously dropped in rankings due to early round losses and minimal attendence in competitions. They could no longer dominate the ATP circuit like the American Faboulous 4 had once done 10 years ago.
Today, the rankings are:
Roger Federer (1)
Andy Roddick (4)
Lleyton Hewitt (18 )
Marat Safin (24)
Another generation of youngesters have entered the spotlight. Led by Rafael Nadal with two grandslams, the other names are Tomas Berdych, Andy Murray, Novak Djokovik, Richard Gasquet, Marcos Baghdatis, and Gaels Mondils. They are continuing to threat the current positions of the Faboulous 4, with Nadal beating Federer and Murray beating Roddick. They can be seen as the Rising 7 in the current era of Tennis.

Rankings:
Nadal (2)
Berdych (12)
Murray (13)
Dijokovik (14)
Gasquet (16)
Baghdatis (17)
Monfils (54)

What do you think will happen in the future. Will the Faboulous 4 led by Federer continue to dominate? For how long? Or will the Rising 7 led by Nadal overpower them and create a dominating era of their own. How so? Why so?

Corresponding fab 4 rankings exactly 10 years ago (Feb 17, 1997):

Sampras (1)
Chang (4)
Agassi (14)
Courier (16)

ShcMad
02-18-2007, 09:40 AM
Starting from 1989 to 2005, there were four major names to remember. Chang, Courier, Agassi, and Sampras. Together, they obtained 27 Grandslams. During the era, people called them: the faboulous 4.

After Sampras' retirement in 2002 and Andre Agassi's gradual decrease in competition, 4 new names came within people's notice. Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, and finally, the formidable Roger Federer. People saw these four names as the next generation that would dominate the ATP circuit. These four new names replaced the four old names. Up to today, they have already taken 15 Grandslams in total. The best representation was the 2005 Australian open semi final draw.
(1) Federer vs (3) Safin
(2) Hewitt vs (4) Roddick

However, things aren't going along the same lines as what the public has been predicting. Other then Federer and Roddick, Safin and Hewitt has been suffering from injuries and has continuously dropped in rankings due to early round losses and minimal attendence in competitions. They could no longer dominate the ATP circuit like the American Faboulous 4 had once done 10 years ago.
Today, the rankings are:
Roger Federer (1)
Andy Roddick (4)
Lleyton Hewitt (18 )
Marat Safin (24)

Another generation of youngesters have entered the spotlight. Led by Rafael Nadal with two grandslams, the other names are Tomas Berdych, Andy Murray, Novak Djokovik, Richard Gasquet, Marcos Baghdatis, and Gaels Mondils. They are continuing to threat the current positions of the Faboulous 4, with Nadal beating Federer and Murray beating Roddick. They can be seen as the Rising 7 in the current era of Tennis.

Rankings:
Nadal (2)
Berdych (12)
Murray (13)
Dijokovik (14)
Gasquet (16)
Baghdatis (17)
Monfils (54)

What do you think will happen in the future. Will the Faboulous 4 led by Federer continue to dominate? For how long? Or will the Rising 7 led by Nadal overpower them and create a dominating era of their own. How so? Why so?

I don't like either of those two groups. I think both of those groups have a couple nuts stuck in there. My personal Fabulous 4 would be: Federer, Safin, Murray, and Gasquet. I see nothing but bright futures with huge wins for Federer and those two youngsters. As far as Safin goes...well, he's Mr. Unpredictable. ;)

caulcano
02-19-2007, 01:43 AM
Starting from 1989 to 2005, there were four major names to remember. Chang, Courier, Agassi, and Sampras. Together, they obtained 27 Grandslams. During the era, people called them: the faboulous 4.

After Sampras' retirement in 2002 and Andre Agassi's gradual decrease in competition, 4 new names came within people's notice. Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, and finally, the formidable Roger Federer. People saw these four names as the next generation that would dominate the ATP circuit. These four new names replaced the four old names. Up to today, they have already taken 15 Grandslams in total. The best representation was the 2005 Australian open semi final draw.
(1) Federer vs (3) Safin
(2) Hewitt vs (4) Roddick

However, things aren't going along the same lines as what the public has been predicting. Other then Federer and Roddick, Safin and Hewitt has been suffering from injuries and has continuously dropped in rankings due to early round losses and minimal attendence in competitions. They could no longer dominate the ATP circuit like the American Faboulous 4 had once done 10 years ago.
Today, the rankings are:
Roger Federer (1)
Andy Roddick (4)
Lleyton Hewitt (18 )
Marat Safin (24)

Another generation of youngesters have entered the spotlight. Led by Rafael Nadal with two grandslams, the other names are Tomas Berdych, Andy Murray, Novak Djokovik, Richard Gasquet, Marcos Baghdatis, and Gaels Mondils. They are continuing to threat the current positions of the Faboulous 4, with Nadal beating Federer and Murray beating Roddick. They can be seen as the Rising 7 in the current era of Tennis.

Rankings:
Nadal (2)
Berdych (12)
Murray (13)
Dijokovik (14)
Gasquet (16)
Baghdatis (17)
Monfils (54)

What do you think will happen in the future. Will the Faboulous 4 led by Federer continue to dominate? For how long? Or will the Rising 7 led by Nadal overpower them and create a dominating era of their own. How so? Why so?


Your Fab 4 (i.e FED) will dominate for 2 more years but I'd put Nadal in there to make it a Fab 5 (he's dominated on clay for 2yrs so merits his inclusion).

I think Murray is doing the leading of the Rising 6 (excluding Nadal) judging by his results. And it will probably be in 3-4 years time once the power shifts, due simply to age.

sebastiange
02-19-2007, 06:36 AM
CHANG?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!

Please, give me a break....


PS: include Juan Martin del Potro on that "Rising Stars" List...

dima
02-19-2007, 06:59 AM
What the hell has this guy done to merit a place in this discussion? He parlayed a couple adequate claycourt tournaments into a career high that still didn't place him in the top 20, and proceeded to follow that up with a later 2/3 of a year that were absolutely God-awful.

Yes, I'm aware he's young, but lots of guys are young. In order to be a riser, don't you have to actually be rising, rather than plummetting? Or at least have to have risen at some point?

Good junior player, decent prospect, but has no place in a discussion of the game's coming elite at this point. He's just not good enough.

Couldn't agree more, he just doesn't have the game.

johnny ballgame
02-19-2007, 07:18 AM
After Sampras' retirement in 2002 and Andre Agassi's gradual decrease in competition, 4 new names came within people's notice. Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, and finally, the formidable Roger Federer. People saw these four names as the next generation that would dominate the ATP circuit.

You left out J.C. Ferrero here as a real #1 contender is this mini-era. He made the finals of three slams (winning one) in 16 months '02 - '03. Ranked #1 in '03. Made semis of Australian Open in '04.

Back then, I was really looking forward to a great multi-faced rivalry of Roddick-Safin-Ferrero-Hewitt-Federer-Kuerten. Was hoping they would trade slams over a number of years.

vkartikv
02-19-2007, 07:56 AM
To the OP:
When I read just the first para of your post I thought you were talking about only the AMERICANS. Then I read your next para about Safin, Hewitt, etc.
ARE YOU CRAZY?? You leave out Edberg and Becker out of the fabulous 4 list?? Nice one

Heavy Metal Tennis Star
02-19-2007, 11:03 AM
mofils is rising?!?!?!?!?

HAHAHA< u gotta be crapping me

he has never made it into the 2nd week of slams, not even a threat to any top 10 players

BigServer1
02-19-2007, 03:30 PM
Since he's the number three favorite in the Vegas books to win Wimbledon and the US Open, it seems others think so too.

Who is #2?

:This is a serious question, by the way:

FedFan_2007
02-19-2007, 05:05 PM
Monfils has rippling muscles like Nadal. Scary dude.

isbisthebest
02-19-2007, 06:04 PM
Ditto. Calling Chang or even Courier one of the 4 best players of their time is ridiculous.
This guy is either joking or has no clue what he's talking about.

Sorry, Chang and the others were called the American's faboulous four. i think i can quote it from a newspaper back in the 1990s.

vkartikv
02-19-2007, 06:05 PM
Sorry, Chang and the others were called the American's faboulous four. i think i can quote it from a newspaper back in the 1990s.

you are comparing oranges with apples. if you talk about the AMERICAN fab four, how can talk about safin, hewitt and the rest in the same breath?????

isbisthebest
02-19-2007, 06:08 PM
Couldn't agree more, he (Monfils) just doesn't have the game.

I don't really agree with your point here because Monfils, a youngster born in 1985 or 86 has reached a career high of like the 20s. He got to have some skill to do that. He is just not doing that great right now. he still has the potential to be back up in the 20s.
If you see Baghdatis as having a slightest bit of talent, Monfils took him out in 4 sets in the Australian open.

isbisthebest
02-19-2007, 06:14 PM
you are comparing oranges with apples. if you talk about the AMERICAN fab four, how can talk about safin, hewitt and the rest in the same breath?????

Although this is not the best comparison, it is unfair to say that during 1995-1997 the Americans dominated the circuit. They were formidable during those years. I believe that's were the name "Fab 4" came from.
I think the only reason why other great players such as becker, edberg, rafter, ivanisevich were left out was becasue they came from seperate places. Although their achievements were great, as individuals, they never were publicized as much as the Americans.

vkartikv
02-19-2007, 06:17 PM
'publicised as much as the americans'???

have you come from mars?? do you even know how popular chang and courier were in even the US during that period???? the rest of the world was celebrating edberg and becker and you're telling me they weren't publicised as much as the americans? do you have some sort of america-mania? you don't know your stuff plus your spelling makes a kindergartener blush.

isbisthebest
02-19-2007, 06:17 PM
But like the above poster mentioned these are just predictions.

I think all of the threads in the "General Pro Player Discussion" are predictions. What thread in the forum is not personal opinion. I think that's what the forum is for. For the fans to say what they want and support their favourite players.

isbisthebest
02-19-2007, 06:23 PM
'publicised as much as the americans'???

have you come from mars?? do you even know how popular chang and courier were in even the US during that period???? the rest of the world was celebrating edberg and becker and you're telling me they weren't publicised as much as the americans? do you have some sort of america-mania? you don't know your stuff plus your spelling makes a kindergartener blush.

You could search all the old newspapers and articles printed during the 90s. i think there are a lot more about the Americans just due to the media power they had.
Also, is it such a big deal to type in one wrong letter in one word? I believe you never made a grammatic error in your adulthood? Besides, does it have anything to do about the point of the post?

isbisthebest
02-19-2007, 06:26 PM
'publicised as much as the americans'???

have you come from mars?? do you even know how popular chang and courier were in even the US during that period???? the rest of the world was celebrating edberg and becker and you're telling me they weren't publicised as much as the americans? do you have some sort of america-mania? you don't know your stuff plus your spelling makes a kindergartener blush.

Besides, i think we are all a bit off track. the point of this thread is to discuss how and when the new players will catch up and overtake the old ones, not about how significant or how great the people who already retired are.
Also, i'm not saying that Becker and the others guys weren't good players.

Rickson
02-19-2007, 06:27 PM
After Sampras' retirement in 2002 and Andre Agassi's gradual decrease in competition, 4 new names came within people's notice. Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, and finally, the formidable Roger Federer. People saw these four names as the next generation that would dominate the ATP circuit. These four new names replaced the four old names. Up to today, they have already taken 15 Grandslams in total. The best representation was the 2005 Australian open semi final draw.
(1) Federer vs (3) Safin
(2) Hewitt vs (4) Roddick

fab 4? This is truly an insult to Federer. Roger is clearly dominating the tour himself, not with Safin, Roddick, and Hewitt. This thread makes no sense at all.

vkartikv
02-19-2007, 06:29 PM
Besides, i think we are all a bit off track. the point of this thread is to discuss how and when the new players will catch up and overtake the old ones, not about how significant or how great the people who already retired are.
Also, i'm not saying that Becker and the others guys weren't good players.

you don't get the point. you dont say fab four and include just 4 americans names in it. If that were the case you'd have to call it the AMERICAN fab 4. end of discussion

isbisthebest
02-19-2007, 06:31 PM
fab 4? This is truly an insult to Federer. Roger is clearly dominating the tour himself, not with Safin, Roddick, and Hewitt. This thread makes no sense at all.

Federer wasn't that great when Hewitt was number one, or else why did Hewitt still take grandslams? I don't think it's fair to say that someone who won consecutive Master Cups isn't dominating the tour.

isbisthebest
02-19-2007, 06:34 PM
you don't get the point. you dont say fab four and include just 4 americans names in it. If that were the case you'd have to call it the AMERICAN fab 4. end of discussion

Yes Sir. The king of the forum. No more dicussion just because you said so and everyone should follow.

I think your're the one who's not getting the point. The point of the thread is not about Chang and Sampras and the others. It's about, as i mentioned before, how fast the youngsters will overtake the circuit.

Zets147
02-19-2007, 06:36 PM
I want the fabulous 4 to get back to their rankings again...