![]() |
USO: Why is it the only Slam currently producing winners outside the Big 3?
Last players other than Federer, Nadal or Djokovic (the Big 3) to win these Slams:
Australian Open: Marat Safin in 2005. French Open: Gaston Gaudio in 2004. Wimbledon: Lleyton Hewitt in 2002. US Open : Juan Martin Del Potro in 2009, Andy Murray in 2012. Compared to the other 3 Slams, the USO has shown itself to be more open to recent winners not named Federer, Nadal or Djokovic. Why is this? Thoughts? |
Relatively paltry sample size don't you think? ;)
|
Only other thing apart from randomness, is that the top 2 - 4 are generally more tired by the U.S Open.
|
Quote:
|
Murray has been knocking on the door of grand slam success for several years and should hardley be considered a long shot winner. Everyone knows Del Potro has the game: he just put it all together in 09'.
Tennis is a game of attrician and often comes down to who has more gas in the tank at the crucial stages of the final. One player has the confidence at the right moment and is able to take advantage of the moment when it counts the most, often one player is not. In Murray's case: he was simply ready to go one step further and was also prepared physically to do so (you saw Nole cramping, getting upset, ETC.) It's true that probability is on the side of certain players making the final rounds of these tournaments because they have the most talent, are in the best shape, have the most experience in big matches, aren't afraid to win, ETC. So, we can with probability expect to see other players putting in the correct preparation and finding themselves in the position of Murray. At the moment Murray may have the highest degree of probability to continue winning these things given the fact that he has all the key components in place. Others may be lurking on the door step: time will tell. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
^ the idea that the top 2 - 4 are more tired by the USO makes no sense whatsoever to me. If anything, the OTHER players would be expected to be more tired as they have to actually play a bunch of tournaments to make a living, while the top few are usually more selective and plan their schedules around the major events.
|
You also forgot to include Roddick for USO
|
Murray entered the top 3 the instant he took championship point, so whilst he started the fortnight outside the triumvirate he had to win to be inside it. Maybe the top 3 rule was upheld in this case...
|
Poor scheduling, no roof, rubbish weather. It is true, part of Murray's slam was the wind and the nonsense schedule.
|
Man, please don't tell me you're a statistician.
|
US - land of opportunity, equality, and diversity.
|
Sorry to say but the OP isnt that supportable. It has happened just twice and the 2 times had been really late.
|
Quote:
And why exactly does a bit of wind and a dodgy schedule affect experienced Slam winners like Federer, Nadal and Djokovic more than the likes of Murray? :confused: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:23 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse