PDA

View Full Version : In the last 10 years.


ninman
09-13-2012, 05:46 PM
Only 10 men have won a major championship. What's more interesting, 5 of the 7 winners, other than Federer, Nadal and Djokovic, have retired.

The 10 years prior to that (i.e. 1993 - 2002), there where 17 different major winners. Sampras winning the most with 13. Amazing how times change.

Cup8489
09-13-2012, 06:21 PM
Man Sampras had such a weak era, with that many slam winners in the same period.

ninman
09-13-2012, 06:51 PM
Man Sampras had such a weak era, with that many slam winners in the same period.

Or maybe it's because there weren't 2 or 3 guys that were clearly better than everybody else?

The fact is we've never had 3 players that are as consistent as in the past. We've had 3 players win 29 of the last 31 majors, and 33 of the last 40, with 5 of the 7 other winners retired (Agassi, Fererro, Roddick, Gaudio and Safin).

I think it's quite incredible myself, and I think in the next 40 majors, we're going to see lots of multiple winners, and probably another 17 or 18 different champions.

Netspirit
09-13-2012, 08:21 PM
I expect Hewitt to retire very soon. This will leave Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and JMDP the only slam winners on tour. I hope I am not forgetting anyone.

jokinla
09-13-2012, 09:33 PM
Man Sampras had such a weak era, with that many slam winners in the same period.

And based on this forum, Fed did too evidently. One of these days we'll get a solid era.

ninman
09-13-2012, 10:29 PM
I expect Hewitt to retire very soon. This will leave Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and JMDP the only slam winners on tour. I hope I am not forgetting anyone.

It's hard to believe that 5 of the 9 other guys who've won slams during Federer's slam winning days have retired. What's more interesting is that Hewitt never won a slam from 2003-2012, his were in the 1993-2002 period.

The reason I chose 2003-2012, because 2003 was the year that Federer won his first slam, so it was interest to take a look at the stats between those years.

I find it incredible that 3 people won 33/40 GS tournamens.

Leelord337
09-13-2012, 10:31 PM
I expect Hewitt to retire very soon. This will leave Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and JMDP the only slam winners on tour. I hope I am not forgetting anyone.

Well Gaudio, but I think he retired?

ninman
09-13-2012, 10:35 PM
Well Gaudio, but I think he retired?

He has retired. Of the 10 people to win slams in the last 10 years, 5 are retired, Agassi, Fererro (about to retire), Roddick (just retired), Gaudio and Safin.

ninman
09-13-2012, 10:39 PM
What's more interesting, only 2 people won a slam during the Sampras (1993-2002), and Federer (2003-2012) eras. Agassi and Safin. I mean would anyone guess that Hewitt would never win a slam after 2002 Wimbledon?

helloworld
09-14-2012, 07:01 AM
What's more interesting, only 2 people won a slam during the Sampras (1993-2002), and Federer (2003-2012) eras. Agassi and Safin. I mean would anyone guess that Hewitt would never win a slam after 2002 Wimbledon?

Safin had so much potential, yet so much mental issues. :(

フェデラー
09-14-2012, 07:37 AM
Or maybe it's because there weren't 2 or 3 guys that were clearly better than everybody else?

The fact is we've never had 3 players that are as consistent as in the past. We've had 3 players win 29 of the last 31 majors, and 33 of the last 40, with 5 of the 7 other winners retired (Agassi, Fererro, Roddick, Gaudio and Safin).

I think it's quite incredible myself, and I think in the next 40 majors, we're going to see lots of multiple winners, and probably another 17 or 18 different champions.

People don't seem to understand this. Most people use the weak era argument just to try to demean what Roger and Rafa (but more so Roger) have accomplished in this era, but maybe they really are just THAT much better than everyone else, I mean that's a possibly right?? Why does it have to be that everyone else is bad, rather than those few are just way too good?