PDA

View Full Version : Dominance of Big 3


McEnroeisanartist
07-05-2012, 06:13 PM
Does anyone else just take a moment to realize the dominance of the Big 3.

From 1969-2003 (34 years), there were three years where a player won 3 or more grand slams in a year. From 2004-2011 (8 years), there were five years where a player won 3 grand slams in a year.

From 1969-2003 (34 years), no player reached 5 or more consecutive grand slam finals. From 2004-2011 (8 years), one player had a streak of 10 consecutive finals and 8 consecutive finals, another player had a streak of 5 finals and another player if he wins tomorrow will reach his 5th consecutive final.

From 1970-2004 (35 years), only once did someone reach all 4 grand slam semifinals in a year. From 2005-2011 (7 years), it has happened 7 times, and it could happen 2 more times in 2012.

Bilders
07-05-2012, 06:18 PM
Great post.

Which player made the semi-finals in all 4 slams between 1970 and 2004?

Bartelby
07-05-2012, 06:22 PM
Its an era of hyper-professionalism where consistency has become the norm and the consistency of surfaces undoubtedly helps.

JustBob
07-05-2012, 06:23 PM
This is why I believe that Murray or Tsonga winning would be "better" for tennis. The dominance of the Big 3 has created predictable results to the point of being quasi boring. Not only that, but it has also created what I would call a warped understanding of what is "normal" in tennis.

For example, an upset of any of the Big 3 is treated like some sort of earth shattering event which turns the tennis world upside down and demands an explanation."How could this happen?" people wonder, while scratching their heads. But historically, the top 2-3 players constantly making it to the semis IS the anomaly, not what has become the few and far between upset(s).

McEnroeisanartist
07-05-2012, 06:24 PM
Great post.

Which player made the semi-finals in all 4 slams between 1970 and 2004?

Lendl in 1987.

Moose Malloy
07-06-2012, 05:54 AM
From 1969-2003 (34 years), no player reached 5 or more consecutive grand slam finals. From 2004-2011 (8 years), one player had a streak of 10 consecutive finals and 8 consecutive finals, another player had a streak of 5 finals and another player if he wins tomorrow will reach his 5th consecutive final.

From 1970-2004 (35 years), only once did someone reach all 4 grand slam semifinals in a year. From 2005-2011 (7 years), it has happened 7 times, and it could happen 2 more times in 2012

your constant threads about finals & semis streaks are pretty misleading(as I'm sure you well know)

The Australian Open in the last 70s/early 80s was basically the equivalent of a 250 today. very few top 10 or even top 20 players played it during that time.

To pretend that Borg wasn't as dominant at the the majors in his time as the big 3 today is ridiculous(he made 6 straight majors finals, are you really not going to count that streak because he skipped a 250 in between those majors? I really doubt he's losing any sleep over the fact that he skipped any of those AOs, judge players not by the standards of today - where the AO offers the same ranking points & prize money as the other majors - but by the standards of their time. Trust me, players today would not be supporting the AO if it was in the same state today as it was back then)

Ditto with your semi streak stats, you aren't counting Connors' streaks either(was banned from the French, as were many other players in the 70s)

anyway, these stats you posted partly show how similar all playing styles & surfaces are today. and the fact that they have easy early rounds compared to past players(32 seeds started in 2001), not really that they are all special, one of a kind players or something.

I expect the list to get even longer in 10 years, career slams, consecutive finals, etc won't seem all that special then(the list of players today who have teached all 4 QF's is growing. ferrer, tsonga, youhzhny, etc. that wasn't common in 80s/90s either)