Do you think Andy and Stan are salty about being kicked out of the big 4?

Booger

Booger

Hall of Fame
A recap for the new folks:

  1. For the better part of a decade, we had the original big four. Fed, Rafa, Novak, and Sir Andrew Francis Murray.
  2. Andy Murray gets booted out of the club after losing almost every Murrovic final and putting the crowd to sleep. Spot #4 is vacated.
  3. Stan Wawrinka takes the empty seat at the big kids table after going beast mode at a few grand salamies. He hit big enough to make prime Nadal and Novak Toevic fake injuries and also cry. Then it was Fed, Rafa, Novak, and Stan in the big 4 for a hot minute.
  4. Stan sucks again, starts dating a tennis thot after his divorce, feuds with Kyrgios, and gets nonsensical tattoos. They boot him out of the club for being trashy.
  5. Now the big 4 has been refined to the big 3 and everyone just forgot there used to be FOUR SEATS. It's as if Murray/Stan never even sniffed the rarefied air of GOAThood.

Who even gets to decide if there's a 4th spot in the club (Brad Gilbert?)? And do you think there is secret resentment? Can you see Andy pulling a Ray Finkle, a la Ace Ventura?


 
D

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
Murray especially. Stan never claimed place among Big 3s. He didn't even consider himself on par with Murray. OTOH Murray/his mother/British media were obsessed getting himself included in Big group although he never deserved it. They basically created Big 4 concept to make Murray look like a dominant champion. He was never that good so eventually settled on low achievements level.
 
Booger

Booger

Hall of Fame
D.Nalby12 said:
Murray especially. Stan never claimed place among Big 3s. He didn't even consider himself on par with Murray. OTOH Murray/his mother/British media were obsessed getting himself included in Big group although he never deserved it. They basically created Big 4 concept to make Murray look like a dominant champion. He was never that good so eventually settled on low achievements level.
Click to expand...


First of all how dare you...

IAT5Ye8.png
 
zagor

zagor

Bionic Poster
Booger said:
  1. For the better part of a decade, we had the original big four. Fed, Rafa, Novak, and Sir Andrew Francis Murray.
  2. Andy Murray gets booted out of the club after losing almost every Murrovic final and putting the crowd to sleep. Spot #4 is vacated.
  3. Stan Wawrinka takes the empty seat at the big kids table after going beast mode at a few grand salamies. He hit big enough to make prime Nadal and Novak Toevic fake injuries and also cry. Then it was Fed, Rafa, Novak, and Stan in the big 4 for a hot minute.
  4. Stan sucks again, starts dating a tennis thot after his divorce, feuds with Kyrgios, and gets nonsensical tattoos. They boot him out of the club for being trashy.
  5. Now the big 4 has been refined to the big 3 and everyone just forgot there used to be FOUR SEATS. It's as if Murray/Stan never even sniffed the rarefied air of GOAThood.

Who even gets to decide if there's a 4th spot in the club (Brad Gilbert?)? And do you think there is secret resentment? Can you see Andy pulling a Ray Finkle, a la Ace Ventura?
Click to expand...

Stan had most of his biggest career wins while dating Dona Vekic IIRC. Now he's with Muguruza I think?
 
zagor

zagor

Bionic Poster
Jokervich said:
Stan has never cared.

Murray is salty over everything. He is the definition of salty. He is particularly salty that the little 3 (Medvedev, Zverev, Tsitsipas) have an easier time in slams against an aged big 3 and may even end up with more slams than him.
Click to expand...

Also keeping in mind that Stan made the most out of his chances (3 out 4 finals, one loss being to video game boss Nadal at the FO), Murray on other hand made 11 slam finals and his 8 losses came against the famous trio. He certainly has more reason to be salty about the next-genners.
 
D

Deleted member 771911

Guest
Murray should count his lucky stars the ATP coined the whole Big 4 and made him a bigger star than he should have been. Guy won 2 slams when the bug 4 were hot while the other 3 were grafting away and being clutch like crazy people.
 
zagor

zagor

Bionic Poster
Booger said:
I had no idea Kokkinakis used to date Muguruza.
Click to expand...

My point is, Stan had his biggest career wins while going through a divorce and dating Vekic. The timeline doesn't make sense to me, the way you presented it.
 
Red Rick

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
zagor said:
Also keeping in mind that Stan made the most out of his chances (3 out 4 finals, one loss being to video game boss Nadal at the FO), Murray on other hand made 11 slam finals and his 8 losses came against the famous trio. He certainly has more reason to be salty about the next-genners.
Click to expand...
It's where being salty goes from being baiting material to completely justified.
 
Booger

Booger

Hall of Fame
zagor said:
My point is, Stan had his biggest career wins while going through a divorce and dating Vekic. The timeline doesn't make sense to me, the way you presented it.
Click to expand...

bro I don't really think he got kicked out of the big 4 for dating Vekic. Just a yoke.
 
zagor

zagor

Bionic Poster
Red Rick said:
It's where being salty goes from being baiting material to completely justified.
Click to expand...

Well yeah. Stan maxed out his potential either way while Murray was cockblocked 8 times by the big 3.

The next genners are not just arguably worse in top ability compared to Murray, they also don't have his work ethic, professionalism and focus. What they have though is a retired Fed, aging Nadal who only plays clay & has crap stamina and aging Novak who has multiple mental walkabouts/drops in intensity in a single match and barely plays or gives a **** about masters tourneys anymore.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
zagor said:
Well yeah. Stan maxed out his potential either way while Murray was cockblocked 8 times by the big 3.

The next genners are not just arguably worse in top ability compared to Murray, they also don't have his work ethic, professionalism and focus. What they have though is a retired Fed, aging Nadal who only plays clay & has crap stamina and aging Novak who has multiple mental walkabouts/drops in intensity in a single match and barely plays or gives a **** about masters tourneys anymore.
Click to expand...
I'm having trouble saying the Next Genners are better than Hewitt/Roddick/Delpo, let alone Murray.
 
Last edited:
M

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
Yes it is a shame Medvedev, Zverev, Tsitsipas, and if he gets himself back together Thiem will probably all achieve more than Murray due to the terrible era they will wind up in. Usually I give precedence to achievements above all else, since everything else is too subjective and subject to personal bias, but I might seriously have to rethink that in 5-6 years time.
 
Strale

Strale

Semi-Pro
Murray was never in the same league as the other 3 guys ability and performance wise...

He capitalized on his peak form when others were injured or had mental and family issues (Novak's case)...

In my and the eyes of every sane person he was just a media product since he is British and that's it....

In eastern Europe where we dont care about bbc and other mainstream western networks (i only watch nat geo wild from foreign channels and news) our perception of Murray is like an average player who had a decent career and that's it...


Never too good,never impressive,never part of the big 3...Just some random guy who had decent results...

He is a tier like Del Potro,Wawrinka,Nishikori etc and he was the best between them...

I understand the frustration of people whose main source of information is western sports media...The same thing happens with english football team and english premier league players...Hyped to the moon but average at best...
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
martinezownsclay said:
Yes it is a shame Medvedev, Zverev, Tsitsipas, and if he gets himself back together Thiem will probably all achieve more than Murray due to the terrible era they will wind up in. Usually I give precedence to achievements above all else, since everything else is too subjective and subject to personal bias, but I might seriously have to rethink that in 5-6 years time.
Click to expand...
We'll have to do that when we're comparing them to many guys, not just Murray.
 
socallefty

socallefty

G.O.A.T.
There’s only a Big 2 since 2019 and maybe a Big 1 in 2021. Focus is on the NextGen Little 3 who are in the top 5.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
NAS said:
They were called big fours because most of the time , these were in business end of the tournament, see Andy overall record.
Even they used to occupy top 4 ranks
Click to expand...
Big 4 made sense up until and including 2013. But once the difference in achievements became way too big between him and Djokovic, it really stopped making sense.

I understand that this moniker was created based on consistency, but when you have 3 guys with 10+ majors, it really should become about achievements.
 
Legend of Borg

Legend of Borg

G.O.A.T.
I actually think he's got plenty of justifiable reasons to be salty and bitter about the next genners.

Prime Murray makes a mockery of the current crop of players, takes 1-2 slams per year, would be a convincing world number #1 and would firmly cement himself as a highly regarded undisputed ATG among the likes of Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Lendl, etc.

Instead, he gets memed on TT in the monthly "is Murray an ATG" threads that end up as a flaming dumpster fire while always being runner up in most important matches involving the GOAT trio. Always there for finals and big matches and always finding a way to to come up short with a runner up plate as a reward at the end.

While his career is something most players can only hope to dream about, his potential to be a legendary ATG player would have been significantly bigger if he was hitting his peak during this current era, I don't think that's a very controversial take.

I'm actually getting kind of p1ssed off myself thinking about all this and I'm not even Murray, lol.
 
Last edited:
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Legend of Borg said:
I actually think he's got plenty of justifiable reasons to be salty and bitter about the next genners.

Prime Murray makes a mockery of the current crop of players, takes 1-2 slams per year, would be a convincing world number #1 and would firmly cement himself as a highly regarded undisputed ATG along the likes of Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Lendl, etc.

Instead, he gets memed on TT in the monthly "is Murray an ATG" threads that end up as a flaming dumpster fire while always being runner up in most important matches involving the GOAT trio. Always there for finals and big matches and always finding a way to to come up short with a runner up plate as a reward at the end.

While his career is something most players can only hope to dream about, his potential to be a legendary ATG player would have been significantly bigger if he was hitting his peak during this current era, I don't think that's a very controversial take.

I'm actually getting kind of p1ssed off myself thinking about all this and I'm not even Murray, lol.
Click to expand...
I'm sure that someone like Roddick feels the same way. The idea that these losers will be Wimb champions eventually must make him sick.
 
Legend of Borg

Legend of Borg

G.O.A.T.
mike danny said:
I'm sure that someone like Roddick feels the same way. The idea that these losers will be Wimb champions eventually must make him sick.
Click to expand...

Yea very similar situation with Roddick however I'm not sure how much he's currently dwelling on what coulda been.

He seems happy with his retirement life and last I heard didn't he throw away his USO trophy or something? Maybe he's trying to let go of the past....
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
martinezownsclay said:
Yes and I am not looking forward to that, since I will have to break a lot of my personal rules of comparing players, and trying to be as objective and fact oriented as humanly possible.
Click to expand...
In my book, it's very hard to compare the Next Gen + Thiem with guys who came beforehand due to the latter guys having prime Big 3 in their paths from 2003 to 2016.
 
M

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
Jokervich said:
Stan has never cared.

Murray is salty over everything. He is the definition of salty. He is particularly salty that the little 3 (Medvedev, Zverev, Tsitsipas) have an easier time in slams against an aged big 3 and may even end up with more slams than him.
Click to expand...

I don't get the impression Murray is bitter about his career or bitter in general, but then again while I like him I am not such a big fanboy to have delved deep enough into all his behavior, comments, vibes, especialy since he sunk to current obscurity for the first time in over a decade, to really know. Someone like @Mainad would be better equiped to give a qualified opinion here.
 
M

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
mike danny said:
In my book, it's very hard to compare the Next Gen + Thiem with guys who came beforehand due to the latter guys having prime Big 3 in their paths from 2003 to 2016.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree. Although when comparing people like Murray or Wawrinka to guys like Becker or Courier I used to argue the greater depth and less surface homogenization of their time mainly negated that (and as indicated I like any rational excuse to go by a mostly results and career first perspective), but that argument can't even be used whatsoever for the current guys either.
 
mike danny

mike danny

Bionic Poster
martinezownsclay said:
Yes I agree. Although when comparing people like Murray or Wawrinka to guys like Becker or Courier I used to argue the greater depth and less surface homogenization of their time mainly negated that (and as indicated I like any rational excuse to go by a mostly results and career first perspective), but that argument can't even be used whatsoever for the current guys either.
Click to expand...
Those guys before the Big 3 era had other ATGs to contend with. The Next Gen will mostly have each other and neither of them is of ATG talent.

We'll have to see how the 2000's born guys will fare if an ATG talent will rise from that group.
 
Last edited:
M

martinezownsclay

Hall of Fame
mike danny said:
Those guys before the Big 3 era had other ATGs to contend with. The Next Gen will mostly have each others and neither of them is of ATG talent.

We'll have to see how the 2000's born guys will fare if an ATG talent will rise from that group.
Click to expand...

Yeah and add to that the surface homogenization which even the Big 3 have benefitted from, but these guys benefit from that plus a rubbish field and no real ATGs to contend with. In the peak of varied playing conditions, you often had lower ranked players that were potentially very dangerous on one surface each, but you don't have that kind of thing anymore at all due to surface homogenization. Basically an ideal situation all around for these players, which would lead to bloated stats compared to virtually all their predecessors given their playing levels.
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
MurraysMetalHip said:
There was never a big four in the first place, other than inside Mark Petchey’s slightly confused brain.
Click to expand...

Do we REALLY need to go over all this yet again and explain yet again how the term came into being and, no, it hasn't got anything to do with Mark Petchey's brain, however confused or not it may be.
 
Rosstour

Rosstour

G.O.A.T.
zagor said:
Well yeah. Stan maxed out his potential either way while Murray was cockblocked 8 times by the big 3.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can say that Stan maxed his potential and Murray didn't...11 Slam Finals are a lot better than four, and Murray got to #1 in the world.

Like him or not, Murray was a reliable presence in Slam SFs and Finals for almost a decade and hardly ever had a shock loss in a Slam (most losses were to The Three Kings).
 
AnOctorokForDinner

AnOctorokForDinner

Talk Tennis Guru
Legend of Borg said:
I actually think he's got plenty of justifiable reasons to be salty and bitter about the next genners.

Prime Murray makes a mockery of the current crop of players, takes 1-2 slams per year, would be a convincing world number #1 and would firmly cement himself as a highly regarded undisputed ATG along the likes of Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Lendl, etc.

Instead, he gets memed on TT in the monthly "is Murray an ATG" threads that end up as a flaming dumpster fire while always being runner up in most important matches involving the GOAT trio. Always there for finals and big matches and always finding a way to to come up short with a runner up plate as a reward at the end.

While his career is something most players can only hope to dream about, his potential to be a legendary ATG player would have been significantly bigger if he was hitting his peak during this current era, I don't think that's a very controversial take.

I'm actually getting kind of p1ssed off myself thinking about all this and I'm not even Murray, lol.
Click to expand...

Good thing Murray gets to retain his dignity rather than become a nasty weak era vulture, no?
 
M

MiamiWeekendWarrior

Hall of Fame
Booger said:
A recap for the new folks:

  1. For the better part of a decade, we had the original big four. Fed, Rafa, Novak, and Sir Andrew Francis Murray.
  2. Andy Murray gets booted out of the club after losing almost every Murrovic final and putting the crowd to sleep. Spot #4 is vacated.
  3. Stan Wawrinka takes the empty seat at the big kids table after going beast mode at a few grand salamies. He hit big enough to make prime Nadal and Novak Toevic fake injuries and also cry. Then it was Fed, Rafa, Novak, and Stan in the big 4 for a hot minute.
  4. Stan sucks again, starts dating a tennis thot after his divorce, feuds with Kyrgios, and gets nonsensical tattoos. They boot him out of the club for being trashy.
  5. Now the big 4 has been refined to the big 3 and everyone just forgot there used to be FOUR SEATS. It's as if Murray/Stan never even sniffed the rarefied air of GOAThood.

Who even gets to decide if there's a 4th spot in the club (Brad Gilbert?)? And do you think there is secret resentment? Can you see Andy pulling a Ray Finkle, a la Ace Ventura?


Click to expand...
3. Stan was never in the Big 4
5. There is no more Big 3. Fedal have fallen out of it due to age and injuries. Novak is barely hanging on to dear life as the Big 1, but even he's not immortal, is long past is prime, and is showing signs of aging out.
 
King No1e

King No1e

G.O.A.T.
I hate stupid threads like this. Wawrinka did not take Murray's spot in the Big 4. If anything he took Nadal's spot for the 3 years he spent up there.

The Big 4 era was over after 2014. Wawrinka just came later, as did Raonic and Dimitrov and Zverev and Medvedev and Grammatikopoulou.
 
-snake-

-snake-

Hall of Fame
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Good thing Murray gets to retain his dignity rather than become a nasty weak era vulture, no?
Click to expand...


What dignity? How can you be a weak era vulture if you won most of your slams vs Fedalovic? Can't you guys see that Murry is nothing but a bitter old fart who can't get over the fact that the sport has moved on and he's not relevant anymore? He's an entitled m*ron, nothing else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Stan practices with all members of the Big 4, but they don't practice with each other. Why?
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
chippy17
C
steenkash
How do you think non-big four/three players think about being compared to them all the time?
Replies
1
Views
216
Deleted member 748597
D
steenkash
Why do you think Andy never reached the heights of Novak, Roger and Nadal
2 3
Replies
127
Views
4K
mike danny
mike danny
Mick
Stan: I'm not as good as the Big Four
2
Replies
69
Views
4K
Chanwan
Chanwan
Amitabh_Tennis
Andy & Andy - The 2 Guys who lost the most in the last 20 years due to Big 3.
Replies
14
Views
420
Borissimo
Borissimo
Top