Whats the issue with the guys outside the top 3 in the world?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by 90's Clay, Aug 3, 2012.

  1. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,540
    You can look back in history.. and we really we have never seen anything like it.. Why are guys today (mainly outside the top 3-4 in the world), so INCAPABLE of winning big titles?


    I guess people can make the argument that how tough it is to break through that wall.... But lets look at the FACTS... Fed's level has gone down over the years, no one is denying that, Djokovic's level has dropped significantly from last year.. Hell whens the last time Nadal has even defended a title off of clay? And he's been injured,

    So its not like we have the trio of Fed, Djoker, Nadal at their respective peaks all at the same time (Which would make this problem more understandable But . NONE of them are at their best clearly in term of peak level.

    Generally, when the older guard's level went down, you had other guys there taking over and picking up where they left off. Yet, today even with the older guards career's declining, diminishing, whatever.. There is still none there to pick the torch up and run with it outside these standard 3 (Fed, Nole, Nadal)

    Yet for whatever reason... no one can take advantage of these things and grab their piece of the pie. How inept can the field truly be?


    Even with the top 3 being at more of their lowest points (if you compare them to their best), still no one can take advantage of that. You would figure by now, we would have at least a few more names thrown in the hat of getting some big titles from these guys, grabbing slams and other big events.

    So many of these guys should be entering the top high points of their careers by now.. Yet no one seems to be doing much of ANYTHING.
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2012
    #1
  2. YouCantBeSerious

    YouCantBeSerious Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    968
    Location:
    Land of the Free Buffet
    The ATP rankings are an ecosystem like any other. And when you have 3 wolves roaming around, the sheep are gonna get hurt.

    It's all a freakish coincidence, but Federer and Nadal have been way too dominant. Then, Djokovic crashes the party last year and has one of the best seasons ever.

    All I know is that it sucks to be Murray.

    And remember that Novak was not part of the Top Club until last year, and it took one of the best seasons ever for that to happen.
     
    #2
  3. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,408
    Ignoring the Australian Open, Borg, McEnroe, and Connors won 18 of 21 slams between 1978 and 1984.

    (McEnroe played the AO once in this time, Borg and Connors zero times.)

    (The three they didn't win were the French Open titles after Borg retired, which he may well have continued winning if he kept playing.)
     
    #3
  4. Manus Domini

    Manus Domini Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,859
    Location:
    Jersey
    Right, and in the past six years, who all has won slams outside of Fedalovic?
     
    #4
  5. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    13,684
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    Del Potro?
     
    #5
  6. tudwell

    tudwell Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    4,408
    Well, I was just pointing out that kind of domination isn't totally unprecedented. I don't think it's ever occurred to the extent it has in the last six years, but there have definitely been periods of incredible domination by only a few individuals.

    If we look at the pro slams before the open era, we have a period from 1960 to 1967 in which Rod Laver and Ken Rosewall won 22 of 25 tournaments (including a run of 16/16 until tennis became open). Now there were fewer people on the pro tour, but they were also playing against the world's best, so that is some extreme domination regardless. The two then went on to win six of the first seven open slams as well.
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2012
    #6
  7. BigServer1

    BigServer1 Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,037
    Location:
    Scottsdale, AZ
    I echo the statements of the OP. For all the "Golden Era" talk we've seen surrounding Men's tennis lately, I sure don't see it past the top guys. As 90's Clay said, none of the top 3 are at their absolute best right now. Federer is past his prime, Djokovic's level has dropped from last year, Nadal's body is betraying him currently.

    It's pretty sad that none of the other guys can step up. It's been nearly two years since someone outside the top 4 won a Masters event, and it's been three years since someone outside the top 3 won a Major...That's staggering, and not really in a good way.

    Past the top 4 in the world, the current ATP field is awful. People love to malign the 2003-2007 period, but this era sure makes me miss seeing guys like Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Agassi, Nalby, Blake, Ljubicic, Ferrero, Coria, Gaudio, Henman etc also competing alongside Federer (and Nadal starting in 2005).
     
    #7
  8. Antonio Puente

    Antonio Puente Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,205
    Location:
    Buenavista
    Yes, but Fed and Nadal are possibly, when all is said and done, the two greatest players ever. Even at a slightly diminished level, they're superior to practically anything that comes along. It takes a pretty high level of play - Djoker 2011 - to crack it. In this era, Roddick and Hewitt types won't do.
     
    #8
  9. papertank

    papertank Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2012
    Messages:
    1,707
    I think it has to do with how the game of tennis has evolved. Today it is all about physicality and movement. Plain and simple, the top 4 guys are by the most fit, best moving players on tour. They can adapt and counter any kind of game that is thrown at them, they have no weaknesses.
     
    #9
  10. SStrikerR

    SStrikerR Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2010
    Messages:
    2,052
    Location:
    Not Fantasy Land
    Clearly the top 3 dope and nobody else does.
     
    #10
  11. Evan77

    Evan77 Banned

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    1,745
    yup, if you are rich you can afford it...
    Rog, probably the worst doper ever (2004/07, plus finding some new undetectable drugs in 2011). only his blind worshipers (i.e. Sid) can't see it
    Rafa 2010 (uncle Toni's medications have expired, but he'll find some new ones soon while Rafa is perfecting his poker skills)
    Djoko 2011 (Dr. Igor should be rehired)

    Murray still struggling to find some good drugs, but he'll get there eventually :)
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2012
    #11
  12. Feña14

    Feña14 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    5,423
    Location:
    England
    So what you're saying is, Murray is the real number 1? ;)
     
    #12
  13. RF-17-GOAT

    RF-17-GOAT Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2012
    Messages:
    447
    I agree with this.
     
    #13
  14. joeri888

    joeri888 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    13,120
    Federer in his peak would destroy Any delpo on grass with breadsticks. Thats how good the Guy was. Federer way Below peak is still significantly better than anyone outside top 3 plus he can add his experience and aura.
     
    #14
  15. Antonio Puente

    Antonio Puente Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,205
    Location:
    Buenavista
    This is a better way of looking at: of the open era 1-3 slam winners, how many of them could win a slam in this era? Can you name one?

    This is why no one is breaking through. They wouldn't be breaking through in this era.
     
    #15
  16. nadal2012uso2013ao

    nadal2012uso2013ao Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    311
    The top 3 have better stamina than everyone else. So after a couple of hours the opponent will get tired and drop their level, while the top 3 player will maintain the high level and win. That's what happened yesterday, Del Potro got tired and dropped off JUST ENOUGH for Federer to win. And Federer has the best stamina in the world, by far. It's not about how well you play, but rather how long you maintain it for. There have been players able to reach the top 3's level, but they were unable to maintain it, hence lost.
     
    #16
  17. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Fairly embarrassing comment to suggest that Federer has the best stamina out there. He has lost a number of big matches due to getting tired. Anyway Nadal, Djokovic and Ferrer are the three fittest and it is not even close. Federer spends his time making his opposition run.

    Del Potro just needs to get back to his old form and regain his confidence. If he could then he is very capable of winning again. Tsonga needs a coach and to sort out how he wants to play. Work on his return and make up his mind once and for all on the backhand.
     
    #17
  18. bullslayer

    bullslayer New User

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2012
    Messages:
    86
    It's because the REAL top 3 has been plagued by injuries and personal tragedies. If there would be no injuries in this world feddo would have had 0 majors as would nadal. Instead the ATP ranking would look like this:

    1. Tommy Haas (5 wimbys, 4 AOs, 5 Us opens)
    2. Joachim Johansson (4 wimbys, 3 AOS, 3 US opens)
    3. Robin Soderking (10 French opens all beating nadal in the final)
    4. Roger Federer
    5. Novak Djokovic
    6. Rafael Nadal
     
    #18
  19. nadal2012uso2013ao

    nadal2012uso2013ao Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    311
    Federer is the only of the top 4 to be completely fine physically after the US Open ever year (or all but one year). Djokovic and Nadal are shot after the US Open. And Murray is also below his best. Federer wins 3 straight events. And its not about indoors, its about stamina. Indoors is the excuse, superior stamina is the reality. And who is better at coming back from 2 sets down in a slam? Federer is the master.
     
    #19
  20. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Federer plays a less physically demanding, less strenuous brand of tennis. He manages his schedule well and takes rest. However, Federer is easily the best indoor player. He is by far the best natural ball striker of the top 4 and taking and in perfect conditions this shows. His serve improves indoors as well and the stats show it is slightly faster.

    The truth is that it is quite the opposite. The only reason Federer can't beat Nadal or Djokovic at the Australian Open is due to stamina. He simply cannot keep playing long points and has to attack earlier than he would like. The only thing that changed in 011 in Djokovic is that he became fitter. He could go with Nadal for the entire match.
     
    #20
  21. Russeljones

    Russeljones G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    12,927
    Please give us a hint, what matches were those?
     
    #21
  22. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Australian Open 09 against Nadal. US Open 010 vs Djokovic had to tank sets to keep energy up. Australian Open 05. Del Potro 09. Australian 08 Djokovic, Australian Open 011 Nadal. Nalbandian WTF 05. To name just a few.

    Not to say he would have won these matches had he had greater fitness. In fact I think he would have still lost most of them even if you magically improved his fitness. However, in the fifth set he had nothing to give. Hence why he lost a lot of them 6-2 or was 5-1 down etc.

    It is really obvious when Federer is exhausted. He can no longer hit any backhands. He kind of just pushes them with his wrist. His footwork goes to pot and he can't run around the forehand porperly. He ends up spraying shots long.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2012
    #22
  23. nadal2012uso2013ao

    nadal2012uso2013ao Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    311
    Nobody comes back from 2 sets to love down better than Federer. He makes Nadal look very restricted physically, by comparison. Look at their records when trailing 2-0. Nobody does it better than Federer in that situation.
     
    #23
  24. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Yes, because Federer is a fighter and is making his opponents run. Federer is the aggressor and his opponents are running from side to side. Find the interviews, watch the matches. Listen to what Lundgren says about Federer. Take Federer into a fifth and he is tired. Why do you think such a mentally tough player, who runs less than his opponent has such a poor 5 set record?

    EDIT

    Here is an article I just found, but it supports what we all know. Federer is so clutch in tie breakers, deciding 3rd sets etc. However, look at his five set record at the time.
    http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/aus/2008-01-17-fivesets-tennis_N.htm
    This was from 08, but it has not changed much.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2012
    #24
  25. Russeljones

    Russeljones G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    12,927
    It's obvious when you're making stuff up.
     
    #25
  26. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Put on the Australian Open 09 and just look. Look at articles. Look at his record in 5 sets. This is the guy with best tie breaker record in slams. The guy, who has won 17 slams and out 24 finals.

    Look at the article. Search comments from Lundgren about the Safin match etc. Federer is always going to try and have a poker face, but you can see it in his game.

    EDIT
    Have a look at this thread to see more about 5 set records of players and how they have improved.
    http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=335267&page=36
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2012
    #26
  27. timnz

    timnz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    4,643
    Evidence?

    The evidence is? It can't be from merely watching sustained great performances, i presume you have details of failed tests etc. surely you wouldnt make such claims otherwise?
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2012
    #27
  28. Russeljones

    Russeljones G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    12,927
    This is the nail in the coffin of your inductive reasoning. I am not even going to bother breaking it down for you. There is no hope.
     
    #28
  29. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    So Federer is one of the most clutch and best deciding 3rd set players ever. Here is the stat. Federer is the best tie break player since records began.
    http://www.atpworldtour.com/Reliability-Zone/Reliability-Tie-Breakers-Career-List.aspx

    It is even higher in slam finals.

    I bet his place in the stat for 3rd set deciders will place him equally high.

    So why the poor 5 set record and especially against players good enough to push him? You have no counter argument and have put forward no evidence. I have shown the stats, articles, given examples in matches. You have given nothing, because you don't know what you are talking about.
     
    #29
  30. Wilander Fan

    Wilander Fan Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,559
    If this were true Gulbis would be dominating everything. He is a scion from a powerful family. If fact, many pros are from very wealthy families...its just a fact of life that tennis requires resources to get good at.

    Also, in general, this top 3 is very misunderstood. Only Federer has been showing this kind of consistent dominance. Look at his records...he has been in virtually every final or semi in every slam since 2004. Nadal is a clay specialist that has broken through a few times on other surfaces during his peak and Djoker is also a very good player in his peak but its only been a couple of years. Take Fed out of the equation and things look very different. Some other clay player probably breaks through against Nadal where Fed could not due to matchup issues. Roddick and Hewitt split US Open and Wimbledons early on. Soderling, Tsonga, Murray, Ferrer, Berdych probably break through for slams as well.
     
    #30
  31. TeflonTom

    TeflonTom Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2012
    Messages:
    920
    cos surface homogenization makes players almost as effective on all courts

    no need to specialize

    old days, a really good specialist could raise his game on his fave surface and beat the best players who might not like it so much

    now lesser players don't get no help from the surface 2 topple higher ranked players
     
    #31
  32. Start da Game

    Start da Game Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2010
    Messages:
    1,006
    haha is this supposed to be a joke post? fed can last for hours and hours, the problem occurs only when he is mentally tired i.e, when an opponent just refuses to give up.......i have seen him get mentally tired in under 1 hour sometimes.......

    it's not even funny you mention australian open 2009 final when nadal was the one actually dead tired for that final after a marathom five and half hour duel against verdasco in the semis and federer was fresh as ever off his 121st straight sets victory over roddick in the semis......
     
    #32
  33. Start da Game

    Start da Game Professional

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2010
    Messages:
    1,006
    surface homogenization......
     
    #33
  34. roberttennis54

    roberttennis54 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    695
    Federer best tie break player in history.
    Longest grass court winning streak in history.
    Longest Hard court winning streak in history.
    Longest stretch without losing to a top player.
    He went a 3 year stretch losing 15 matches in total.

    I could go on, but apparently he is easily mentally fatigued?

    Yeh Federer was fresh going into the Australian Open final and Nadal was more drained. The final was physically brutal. Federer had nothing to give after the 4th set. Nadal still had more energy and it showed.

    Compare that with the rain delays of 08 Wimbledon in 07. In 08 Federer was not as good as the Aussie final, but the faster points and the rain delays meant he could cope fine. In 07 Nadal was playing even better than 09 Australia, but once again rain delays and faster surfaces meant he could compete much better.
     
    #34
  35. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Balls are an attribute that seem to be reserved to the top 3 players.The others, just are not blessed with them.from nº 4 to nº 1000
     
    #35
  36. TigerTim

    TigerTim Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    234
    If Murray has been coached by Lendl since 2006 it might have been slightly different............
     
    #36
  37. TigerTim

    TigerTim Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    234
    agree, if it wasn't for Nadal Federer would have 25 slams, he is the only person who seems to beat him mentally before entering the court.
     
    #37
  38. TigerTim

    TigerTim Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    234
    don't forget the Houdini in a headband ;) (Borg)
     
    #38

Share This Page