2 Lucky Losers and a Qualifier in the QF's of a Masters. Is this the current/future state of the men's tour?

[Aussie Darcy]

Incredibly rare for one lucky loser to make it to the 4R of a Masters or slam let alone make it to the QF. Yet in Madrid this year we have not one but two lucky losers in the QF as well as a qualifier and an unseeded player.

Is this shaping up to be the future of the ATP without the big 3? The #3 in the world losing 2R to a qualifier in straight sets? The #2 in the world losing to a qualifier in straight sets? Multiple players losing in qualifying yet scraping into the main draw as lucky losers and then winning 4 matches in a row to make a Masters QF?

 

[ghostofMecir]

This is every week on the WTA tour

 

[Aussie Darcy]

This is every week on the WTA tour

Please show me when two lucky losers and a qualifier were last in the QF's of a WTA1000 or slam. Otherwise, apologize for nonsense.

 

[accidental]

This is what happens when there are 2 consecutive failure generations. Now we are supposed to rely on 19/20 year olds being dominant week in week out

 

[Robert F]

A positive spin would be that the competition is becoming tougher and tougher across the board in that the difference between #50 and #200 isn't as big as it used to be.
I think this has been true to some extent. Compared to pre 2000, looking at the Big 3 Era, you had a few distinct levels--big 3 (maybe 2 levels above the next), current top 20, current top 50, current 100 then 100-250.
Now with big 3 gone, you might have Top 10, Top 50, Top 150, then 150-300 as level differences. Even so the difference between the levels is closer than it was before.

Prior to 90's, sometimes a guy from around #100 was miles away from #1. Seemed like the talent crowded the top 20 then dropped off. Now a guy in the top 200 can have a great day and really challenge a top 50. But all the talent is better in general.

 

[AM75]

This is every week on the WTA tour

Don't say that, it's misogynist.

 

[Kralingen]

You’d be shocked how often this stuff would happen in previous generations, we just don’t remember it as well.

That being said, all this is making me realize how, it really wasn’t just the Big 3 but the supporting stars (Murray, Berdych, Ferrer, to a lesser extent Tsonga, Almagro, etc) who were outliers in their consistency as players

 

[AM75]

When was the last time the qualifier won the men's singles Slam? In women's singles this happened in 2021. The same year the Nr 32 and Nr 33 fought for the RG title in the final.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

When was the last time the qualifier won the men's singles Slam? In women's singles this happened in 2021. The same year the Nr 32 and Nr 33 fought for the RG title in the final.

That's cute. Nothing about lucky losers though? Players who LITERALLY lost in qualifying yet won 4 matches straight to make the QF. And not one... TWO. On the mens side. What you think about that AM75?

 

[tennis3]

In a word, yes. This is in fact the current and future state of the men’s tour.

By the way, no need to bash the WTA here. They aren’t responsible

 

[nolefam_2024]

Incredibly rare for one lucky loser to make it to the 4R of a Masters or slam let alone make it to the QF. Yet in Madrid this year we have not one but two lucky losers in the QF as well as a qualifier and an unseeded player.

Is this shaping up to be the future of the ATP without the big 3? The #3 in the world losing 2R to a qualifier in straight sets? The #2 in the world losing to a qualifier in straight sets? Multiple players losing in qualifying yet scraping into the main draw as lucky losers and then winning 4 matches in a row to make a Masters QF?

Pretty standard for dirt tournaments tbh.

 

[nolefam_2024]

That's cute. Nothing about lucky losers though? Players who LITERALLY lost in qualifying yet won 4 matches straight to make the QF. And not one... TWO. On the mens side. What you think about that AM75?

Reaching qf of a masters is still not as much travesty as winning a freaking grand slam. AM75 doesn't even need to defend ATP. It's superiority is implicit.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Reaching qf of a masters is still not as much travesty as winning a freaking grand slam. AM75 doesn't even need to defend ATP. It's superiority is implicit.

Do you not understand the difference between a lucky loser and a qualifier? Cause I can educate you if you need some help learning? It involves losing a match but making it into a main draw. Feel free to message me if you want to learn how someone winning 10 consecutive matches isn't a travesty compared to two men losing matches but then getting into the draw, winning 4 matches and making a Masters QF? Now THAT is a travesty.

 

[nolefam_2024]

Do you not understand the difference between a lucky loser and a qualifier? Cause I can educate you if you need some help learning? It involves losing a match but making it into a main draw.

I don't spend a lot of energy differenciating between a lucky loser winning just like a qualifier.

 

[insideguy]

I think pretty much 80 percent of this board, back to front has no respect for athletes outside of the very top level. Which is hilarious as most have never competed. All of these people are better than you would ever dream of and work harder than you would ever think of. And in individual sports like this stuff happens. This isnt a a book script. Otherwise what is the ****ing point?

 

[kevin qmto]

These 3 guys have been playing the most interesting tennis of the event (Karatsev in particular).

Of course some people would complain about this.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

I don't spend a lot of energy differenciating between a lucky loser winning just like a qualifier.

Yeah one is a loser who lost matches yet are into a 1000 QF while Raducanu who you're trying to say is a travesty actually won 10 straight matches. No surprise you criticise the women though, we see you for who you are.

 

[insideguy]

Fans on these places are just out of their minds. I was watching this documentary on Disney plus on the Australian women's soccer team. These athletes dont ever for one second think like people on these boards do. They work their asses off day in day out to achieve their goals. They dont think we cant win or won't win or whatever. So many fans of teams or players are great. But god so many are worthless.

 

[tennis3]

Do you not understand the difference between a lucky loser and a qualifier? Cause I can educate you if you need some help learning? It involves losing a match but making it into a main draw. Feel free to message me if you want to learn how someone winning 10 consecutive matches isn't a travesty compared to two men losing matches but then getting into the draw, winning 4 matches and making a Masters QF? Now THAT is a travesty.

Emma winning the US Open as a qualifier was amazing. I doubt we will ever see that again. It does say something about the current state of the tour. But it was one of the best sports stories in the past many years

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Emma winning the US Open as a qualifier was amazing. I doubt we will ever see that again. It does say something about the current state of the tour. But it was one of the best sports stories in the past many years

State of that tour since then saw a dominant #1 win 2 slams (Barty) before retiring and then replaces by an even more dominant #1 who won 2 slams and went on a 37 match winning streak.

 

[tennislove00]

WTA got their top3 in quarters, maybe even semis. WTA looks more stable than ATP recently with Swiatek, Sabalenka and Rybakina leading the tour.

 

[MeatTornado]

One of the Lucky Losers is Struff. He's been a legit player, just has a low ranking at the moment. He just made the quarters of Monte-Carlo a few weeks ago by taking out some seeds.

The other LL is Daniel Altmaier, who got here by beating the world #94, 108 and 88. Not exactly crazy stuff where seeds are embarrassingly crashing out against a LL.

And the qualifier is Karatsev, the guy who we saw suddenly turn it on a couple years ago, breaking into the top 15 and making the AO semis. We all know what kind of tennis he's capable of when playing well.

Add all of this together with a ton of seeds dropping out (Djokovic, Nadal, Sinner, Berrettini) and suddenly there's some open paths to the quarters.

 

[mahesh69a]

I am sure you questioned the future of WTA and Women's tour during (the most prestigious tennis tournament) Wimbledon in 2018 when several unprecedented things happened:

Wiki "With each of the top ten seeds losing before the quarterfinals, it was the worst overall Wimbledon performance of the top ten women's seeds in the Open Era. This was also the first time in the Open Era that none of the top four women's singles seeds reached the fourth round at Wimbledon."

 

[AM75]

I am sure you questioned the future of WTA and Women's tour during (the most prestigious tennis tournament) Wimbledon in 2018 when several unprecedented things happened:

Wiki "With each of the top ten seeds losing before the quarterfinals, it was the worst overall Wimbledon performance of the top ten women's seeds in the Open Era. This was also the first time in the Open Era that none of the top four women's singles seeds reached the fourth round at Wimbledon."

When this happens on the WTA tour it’s the proof of the high quality of women’s game; when something like this happens with the ATP, it’s a sign of the dire state of men’s tennis.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

When this happens on the WTA tour it’s the proof of the high quality of women’s game; when something like this happens with the ATP, it’s a sign of the dire state of men’s tennis.

I love how you couldn't answer any of my questions since you knew you were wrong so you attached yourself to someone else attacking the women's tour. So cute. Do you know now what a lucky loser is? Cause you didn't want to discuss it earlier.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

I am sure you questioned the future of WTA and Women's tour during (the most prestigious tennis tournament) Wimbledon in 2018 when several unprecedented things happened:

Wiki "With each of the top ten seeds losing before the quarterfinals, it was the worst overall Wimbledon performance of the top ten women's seeds in the Open Era. This was also the first time in the Open Era that none of the top four women's singles seeds reached the fourth round at Wimbledon."

FIVE years ago, your posting about. Five years ago. #1 Alcaraz was barely 14 years old and your mentioning it. But no comments on the state of the current mens tour? Why are you not talking about the current state of things? You that triggered by criticism of the men?

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Reaching qf of a masters is still not as much travesty as winning a freaking grand slam. AM75 doesn't even need to defend ATP. It's superiority is implicit.

This thread is just another lame attempt of OP to attack men’s tennis. Can be safely ignored.

 

[mahesh69a]

FIVE years ago, your posting about. Five years ago. #1 Alcaraz was barely 14 years old and your mentioning it. But no comments on the state of the current mens tour? Why are you not talking about the current state of things? You that triggered by criticism of the men?

I am just questioning your objectivity (I know, there is no point - since you have none) - I have seen enough tennis to know that both tours had ups and downs over the decades.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

I am just questioning your objectivity (I know, there is no point - since you have none) - I have seen enough tennis to know that both tours had ups and downs over the decades.

So you admit that this is a down period for the men's tour which was the premise of the thread? So easy to answer.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

This thread is just another lame attempt of OP to attack men’s tennis. Can be safely ignored.

Attack? It's just facts? Are two lucky losers in a QF of a Masters 1000? Yes or no?

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Attack? It's just facts? Are two lucky losers in a QF of a Masters 1000? Yes or no?

It’s fact but I cannot help to think that you mention it with a specific agenda. Somebody opens a thread about such “facts” about WTA and you would be in there directly.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

It’s fact but I cannot help to think that you mention it with a specific agenda. Somebody opens a thread about such “facts” about WTA and you would be in there directly.

Facts are facts unless you're Donald Trump. If someone was posting actual facts about the WTA then I can't argue with facts. Seems quite a few people on this thread had a hard time admitting the facts of this Madrid mens tournament.

 

[Robert F]

Lucky Loser vs. Qualifier was a pretty good match.
Shows you how talented all these guys are and that the secrets at the top is mental. The ability to bring it day in and day out and find ways to win when you are not playing your A game.

 

[Spin Diesel]

Do you not understand the difference between a lucky loser and a qualifier? Cause I can educate you if you need some help learning? It involves losing a match but making it into a main draw. Feel free to message me if you want to learn how someone winning 10 consecutive matches isn't a travesty compared to two men losing matches but then getting into the draw, winning 4 matches and making a Masters QF? Now THAT is a travesty.

What is wrong with you? You think you can just post negative comments on male tennis and it‘s normal and as soon as someone does similarly on WTA he‘s what, misogynist?

ATP slam and 1000s so far:
AO final: Tsitsipas - Djokovic
Indian Wells: Alcaraz - Medvedev
Miami: Medvedev - Sinner
Monte Carlo: Rublev - Rune
All Top10 .. but then you see this one finalist and you don‘t even think about how this happened, probably didn‘t watch a single match and judge the whole ATP on that one tournament? Pathetic!

 

[Spin Diesel]

@Aussie Darcy
Apart from all of that you‘re just ignoring all the good explanation comments like these for example.

One of the Lucky Losers is Struff. He's been a legit player, just has a low ranking at the moment. He just made the quarters of Monte-Carlo a few weeks ago by taking out some seeds.

The other LL is Daniel Altmaier, who got here by beating the world #94, 108 and 88. Not exactly crazy stuff where seeds are embarrassingly crashing out against a LL.

And the qualifier is Karatsev, the guy who we saw suddenly turn it on a couple years ago, breaking into the top 15 and making the AO semis. We all know what kind of tennis he's capable of when playing well.

Add all of this together with a ton of seeds dropping out (Djokovic, Nadal, Sinner, Berrettini) and suddenly there's some open paths to the quarters.

I think pretty much 80 percent of this board, back to front has no respect for athletes outside of the very top level. Which is hilarious as most have never competed. All of these people are better than you would ever dream of and work harder than you would ever think of. And in individual sports like this stuff happens. This isnt a a book script. Otherwise what is the ****ing point?

 

[Spin Diesel]

And even more you just insist on that lucky looser thing. But if you took just one minute of thinking about it, you would see that Karatsev was once ranked 14 in the world and he‘s just finding his best form again. So losing to him isn‘t as bad a thing as if you judge it like you do - without any consideration - only on his current ranking. And as said qualifier reached the semis as well, it just shows that currently both are playing at a great level.

 

[Subway Tennis]

Incredibly rare for one lucky loser to make it to the 4R of a Masters or slam let alone make it to the QF. Yet in Madrid this year we have not one but two lucky losers in the QF as well as a qualifier and an unseeded player.

Is this shaping up to be the future of the ATP without the big 3? The #3 in the world losing 2R to a qualifier in straight sets? The #2 in the world losing to a qualifier in straight sets? Multiple players losing in qualifying yet scraping into the main draw as lucky losers and then winning 4 matches in a row to make a Masters QF?

There is absolutely no doubt that the ATP is struggling at the moment.

There are some glimpses of what is to come with the superlative breakthrough of Alcaraz, but as a tour it’s very uneven right now and basically treading water. No escaping that.

I’m very positive of what is just around the corner with Rune, Korda, Sinner etc etc, but they are not quite there yet, and we are in a low ebb while we wait for them and also deal with the hangover of Federer’s retirement, and the uncertainty over Nadal.

It’s almost become a rule on TTW to talk negatively about the WTA, but if the ATP shapes up similar to WTA over the coming year, that would be a good result.

On the WTA you have a consistent Number 1, but she has strong challengers who can and will beat her (even on clay, if it’s fast enough). And in the top 15 or so you have a ruling class of 5 players who have all won recent majors and who are all in the conversation at the start of every mandatory and major.

 

[Sampras-Bruguera 1993]

Incredibly rare for one lucky loser to make it to the 4R of a Masters or slam let alone make it to the QF. Yet in Madrid this year we have not one but two lucky losers in the QF as well as a qualifier and an unseeded player.

Is this shaping up to be the future of the ATP without the big 3? The #3 in the world losing 2R to a qualifier in straight sets? The #2 in the world losing to a qualifier in straight sets? Multiple players losing in qualifying yet scraping into the main draw as lucky losers and then winning 4 matches in a row to make a Masters QF?

We are basically a Sinner/Carlos big time injury away from guys like Rublev having an Agassi/Lendl type career

 

[Tennfan123]

It’s the past repeated.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Edit: Nevermind

 

[Krish872007]

I don't think it's "that" bad, at least Alcaraz is continuing his good form and showing that getting to #1 last year wasn't a fluke or anything - he is definitely the real deal.
Medvedev and Sinner also found consistency post the AO
Players like Struff stringing together a couple of great weeks can happen from time to time. More work to be done across the whole tour though, we are certainly not in a secure post-Big 3 era

WTA looks impressive though - consistency at the top of the game with Swiatek, Sabalenka, Rybakina, etc reaching multiple finals and competing at the highest of levels. No "old guard" domination, these are all young women in their early / mid 20s capable of playing excellent and exciting attacking tennis. Sabalenka's win last night was super impressive

 

[Halba]

Worst era ever after the strongest era ever in history(due to the big four)